Sensory processing test reported sense by sense

It is one of the commonest patterns there is, and the two-axis layout exists to show it rather than to flatten it. How readily something registers with you and how much you want it are separate facts: a low threshold means the fridge hum reaches you when it reaches nobody else, and a high appetite means you put music on loud because the input is welcome when you chose it. The thing they have in common is often control — an input you selected and can stop is a different experience from one arriving at you from the next desk. A single sensitivity score would have averaged those two statements into a middling number describing neither.

Because a quadrant is a placement against a standardization sample, and that sample is the part that is sold. The four-quadrant framework itself is published theory — Dunn (1997) set out the idea that a threshold for noticing crosses with an active or passive way of responding — and describing it costs nothing. What costs is the norm table that decides where your score stops being one quadrant and becomes another, and that table is a commercial clinical product. Printing a quadrant name without it would be the same claim with none of the evidence behind it, so the page hands you the twelve raw numbers and the framework to read them with.

Not a standalone one in the current psychiatric manual, and that is worth knowing before any test in this area is interpreted. Hyper- or hypo-reactivity to sensory input appears in the DSM-5 as one of the criteria for autism spectrum disorder rather than as a condition in its own right, and a proposal to list it separately was not adopted. Occupational therapists work with it as a clinical construct daily, and whether it should have its own entry is an open argument rather than a settled question. None of that makes the experience less real; it does mean that no questionnaire, here or anywhere, can hand you a label the manual does not contain.

Because the pattern block is defined in cycles per degree of visual angle, and a browser cannot work that out on its own. CSS defines an inch as 96 pixels by fiat, which is right on almost no real display — a dense laptop panel packs far more pixels into a physical inch, so a pattern drawn on the nominal assumption would be much finer than intended and would land in a different part of the spatial-frequency range. A bank card is 85.6 mm wide everywhere in the world by ISO standard, so matching a bar to one gives a true pixels-per-millimeter figure, and your stated eye distance does the rest of the trigonometry.

No — you ran into the display, and the page tells you when that is about to happen. At an ordinary desk distance the 12-cycle pattern works out at under two pixels a stripe, and a screen cannot render alternating black and white lines that thin without them blending toward a flat gray. That is a limit of the hardware rather than of your vision, which is precisely why the middle pattern is the one the result leans on and why the fine one is there as a comparison rather than as a measurement in its own right.

Interoception is the sense of the body's internal state — heartbeat, breathing, hunger, thirst, temperature, the condition of the gut — and it is left out of most sensory questionnaires despite being the channel people are most often quietly confused by. Difficulty reading it looks like realizing at four in the afternoon that the bad mood was hunger, or not registering a full bladder until it is urgent. It is included here because leaving it out would suggest sensory processing is only about what arrives from outside, and because it is the channel that connects this page most directly to how people describe difficulty naming emotions.

It does not, and the reasoning is worth spelling out because this is the inference people arrive here already half-making. Sensory reactivity is one criterion among several for autism and is not sufficient on its own; it also occurs in migraine, in anxiety, in attention difficulties, after concussion, in people who are simply tired, and in a substantial number of people with no clinical anything who are just built that way. A profile of self-reported frequencies cannot distinguish between those, and a page that implied otherwise from twelve numbers would be doing exactly the thing this site refuses to do. What the profile is good for is the concrete part: knowing which channel is loud for you is what makes a room, a job or an evening adjustable.