For Researchers

Research Entry Point

Anna Paretas-Artacho · TEG-Blue Research Consortium · February 2026

What TEG-Blue has found, what questions remain open, and where different areas of expertise connect to the work.

The Architecture

Measurement System

Four-Mode Gradient

Nervous system states detectable in natural language. Empirically validated.

Connection → Protection → Control → Domination

Explanatory Architecture

12 Frameworks

Integrates 139+ theories explaining why the modes exist and how they scale.

View Theory Map →

Assessment Instruments

Emotional Tools

16 gradient scales and assessments. Designed, not yet psychometrically validated.

Research Hub →

The Core Testable Claim

The key variable that predicts relational and behavioral outcomes is not a person's current regulatory state, but their capacity to return to Connection when challenged.

This capacity is measurable. It shows up in language through complexity markers — signs of self-awareness, perspective-taking, and emotional differentiation.

What Has Already Been Demonstrated

Validation Study DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18428907

A computational analysis of 10,000+ natural conflict narratives (Reddit AITA posts) tested whether the four-mode gradient could be reliably detected in unstructured text.

Key Findings

All four regulatory modes were successfully detected
33.8% of individuals escalated toward Control/Domination when challenged
22.2% de-escalated toward Connection
De-escalators showed 78% higher rates of complexity markers than escalators
Mode classifications correlated with independent community moral judgments

What this established: The four-mode gradient is not just a theoretical model — it maps onto observable patterns in natural language. And the distinction between escalation and de-escalation is linguistically measurable.

Open Research Questions

The validation study opened more questions than it answered. Below are specific research questions that remain open. Each stands as an independent research project.

Question 1: What exactly are the complexity markers, and can they be standardized?

The gap: Self-awareness is discussed everywhere in psychology but rarely operationalized as a measurable linguistic construct.

Relevant expertise: Computational linguistics, NLP, psycholinguistics, quantitative psychology

Related frameworks: F1 (Emotional Gradient), F3 (Cognitive Coherence), F6 (State-Dependent Perception)

Question 2: What do escalation and de-escalation pathways look like in natural language?

The gap: Escalation models exist in conflict research, but none map the specific linguistic trajectory from protective responses through to controlling or dominating ones.

Relevant expertise: Conflict studies, discourse analysis, social psychology, clinical psychology

Related frameworks: F1 (Emotional Gradient), F7 (Anatomy of Tyranny), F4 (Threat-Based Rule Internalization)

Question 3: Can the four-mode classification be reproduced by independent researchers?

The gap: The validation study demonstrated detection computationally. For the framework to become a research tool, it needs formalized criteria and inter-rater reliability testing.

Relevant expertise: Research methodology, psychometrics, content analysis, behavioral coding

Related frameworks: F1 (Emotional Gradient), F12 (Two Information Systems)

Question 4: Does regulatory state shape moral perception?

The gap: Moral psychology has not examined whether nervous system regulatory state systematically shifts which moral judgments people make.

Relevant expertise: Moral psychology, social cognition, cognitive bias research

Related frameworks: F5 (Threat-Driven Worth Sorting), F6 (State-Dependent Perception)

Question 5: Can the Emotional Tools be validated as psychometric instruments?

The gap: TEG-Blue includes 16 assessment instruments (gradient scales) that are designed but not yet psychometrically validated.

Relevant expertise: Psychometrics, clinical psychology, personality assessment, scale development

Related frameworks: All frameworks; F1 and F8–F10 most directly tested

Collaboration Structure

Available Resources

A validated theoretical framework with published empirical support
A dataset of 10,000+ analyzed conflict narratives ready for further extraction
16 designed assessment instruments ready for psychometric validation
A clinical assessment methodology (Deep Diver Framework) ready for testing
Full theoretical documentation across 12 frameworks
Open science infrastructure (Zenodo, OSF, GitHub)

Expertise Needed

Domain expertise in computational linguistics, NLP, psycholinguistics, conflict studies, moral psychology, psychometrics, or clinical psychology
Access to participant samples for instrument validation
Computational linguistics / NLP expertise for automating complexity marker detection
Clinical psychology expertise for testing the Deep Diver assessment framework

Collaboration Formats

Collaboration ranges from consulting on a specific question to co-authoring a publication. All collaborations operate under clear agreements on authorship, attribution, and intellectual property from the start.

Specific question review — Data and documentation available for any research question
Co-authorship — Several publication-ready projects outlined in the Research Development Roadmap
Instrument validation — Emotional Tools are designed and documented, ready for testing
Methodological review — Critical feedback on methodology and findings welcomed

Get Involved

If your expertise connects to any of the open questions above, we'd welcome a conversation.

Contact: research@teg-blue.org View Publications