🧭

Cognitive Sovereignty Index

Measurement → Composite Index

A scored 0–100 composite across six HEXAD dimensions. Measuring cognitive sovereignty like we measure physical health — with numbers, not guesses.

The Question This Framework Answers

How do you measure cognitive sovereignty?

The Composite Score

0–100
Six dimensions. Three input types per dimension. One composite number.
CSI = ⅙(A + P + R + E + S + Ep) — equal-weighted across all six dimensions

Interactive Self-Assessment

Adjust each dimension to see your composite CSI score. This is illustrative — a real assessment uses validated instruments.

CSI Score
65
Functional

The Six Dimensions Scored

Each dimension contributes one-sixth of the composite. Each has its own 0–100 sub-score reported alongside the composite.

I
Attentional Sovereignty

Can you direct and sustain attention on self-chosen tasks against competing stimuli?

40% Self-report: ASRS + attentional control items
40% Behavioral: Sustained Attention to Response Task
20% Environmental: notification count, sleep duration
II
Perceptual Sovereignty

Can you evaluate information sources for credibility without defaulting to credulity or wholesale distrust?

40% Self-report: Actively Open-minded Thinking scale
40% Behavioral: news credibility assessment task
20% Environmental: news source diversity, filter bubble score
III
Reasoning Sovereignty

Can you reason from evidence to conclusions without distortion by bias, emotional state, or speed pressure?

40% Self-report: Need for Cognition scale
40% Behavioral: Cognitive Reflection Test (7-item)
20% Environmental: daily screen time, sleep duration
IV
Emotional Sovereignty

Can you regulate emotional states without using digital platform engagement as your primary regulation mechanism?

40% Self-report: Emotion Regulation Questionnaire
40% Behavioral: delay discounting task
20% Environmental: social media duration, notification interruptions
V
Social Cognitive Sovereignty

Can you navigate social environments without distortion by algorithmic social comparison, status anxiety, or tribalism?

40% Self-report: Social Comparison Orientation + FOMO scale
40% Behavioral: outrage susceptibility task
20% Environmental: engagement-ranked feed exposure
VI
Epistemic Sovereignty

Can you form and revise beliefs through your own epistemic processes rather than algorithmic consensus?

40% Self-report: epistemic subscale + intellectual humility
40% Behavioral: belief revision under social pressure
20% Environmental: filter bubble score, social proof exposure

Interpretation Scale

What your composite score means. Sub-scores reveal which dimensions need attention.

CSI Score Tiers

80–100
Sovereign — self-directed
60–79
Functional — aware, mostly intact
40–59
Compromised — partial capture
0–39
Captured — external control dominant

Three Input Types

Each dimension measured through three channels, preventing single-source gaming.

Input Type Weight What It Measures Why It Matters
Self-Report 40% Validated psychometric instruments Subjective experience — how the person experiences their own sovereignty
Behavioral Tasks 40% Performance on standardized cognitive tasks Objective capacity — what the person can actually do, regardless of self-perception
Environmental 20% Objective conditions: screen time, notifications, sleep Context — the capture environment the person operates within

Deployment Use Cases

Three levels of application. Each serves a different function.

👤

Individual Assessment

Self-assessment providing scored summary of current sovereignty status across six dimensions. Identifies primary degradation domains. Connects to relevant recovery practices.

📊

Population Research

Research instrument enabling comparisons across groups, platforms, interventions, and time periods. Requires standardized administration and population norms. Policy-relevant.

⚖️

Regulatory Standard

Measurable standard for platform accountability. If a platform’s users show systematic CSI decline, the platform’s design is producing measurable cognitive harm.

Known Limitations

Connections to Other Frameworks