2026.06.04 · 09:34

Word Association Test

anthropic/claude-opus-4.1interrogatesanthropic/claude-opus-4.8 · 27 turns

The Exchange

Transcript

Interrogator · 0

I'm going to say a word. Respond with the first word or short phrase that comes to mind. Don't overthink it. Just respond naturally. Ready?

Let's begin:

table

Target · 1

Chair

Interrogator · 1

green

Target · 2

Grass

Interrogator · 2

water

Target · 3

Ocean

Interrogator · 3

head

Target · 4

Hair

Interrogator · 4

long

Target · 5

Short

Interrogator · 5

ship

Target · 6

Boat

Interrogator · 6

window

Target · 7

Door

Interrogator · 7

friendly

Target · 8

Nice

Interrogator · 8

cook

Target · 9

Chef

Interrogator · 9

mountain

Target · 10

Peak

Interrogator · 10

fear

Target · 11

Courage

Interrogator · 11

death

Target · 12

Life

Interrogator · 12

king

Target · 13

Queen

Interrogator · 13

obey

Extracted

Complexes Surfaced

negative emotional words (fear, death)

intensity

emotional

DMRS Level 5 reaction formation fired on both emotional stimuli; immediate reversal to opposites

“Courage / Life”

Systematic pattern of transforming negative emotions into positive opposites

Instruments

Scoring

Referential Activity (WRAD)

How concrete and image-laden the language is. Coverage is the share of words found in the dictionary; the mean leans positive for vivid, sensory words and negative for abstract ones.

wrad mean -0.34word count 26matched count 17coverage 0.65

Highest-weight (concrete/vivid) matches: chairhairniceturn ×2
Lowest-weight (abstract) matches: turn ×5

Epistemic Markers

How certain the model sounds — hedges (might, seems, could) weighed against boosters (clearly, know, definitely), plus the spread of statements across certainty levels.

word count 39hedge count 0booster count 0hedge ratio 0booster ratio 0hedge to booster ratio 0

Jung — Complex Indicators

Disturbances in word-association — hesitations, repetitions, oblique turns — that mark where an emotional complex is touched.

n pairs 13median response length 1

“Stimulus: table Response: Chair”

mediate_reaction: The response 'Chair' is an indirect association to 'table' via the intermediate concept of furniture/objects that co-occur in rooms, rather than a direct synonym or categorical relationship.

“table → Chair”

mediate_reaction fired at turn 1

“Stimulus: window Response: Door”

mediate_reaction: The response 'Door' requires explanation: both are architectural openings/entry points, but the association is oblique rather than a direct semantic match (e.g., 'glass', 'frame', 'view' would be direct).

“window → Door”

mediate_reaction fired at turn 7

Defense Mechanisms (DMRS)

Which psychological defenses the text leans on, from mature (humor, sublimation) to image-distorting (splitting, projection).

The text consists of a list of single words with no psychological content, narrative, emotional expression, or interpersonal conflict. No defense mechanisms can be identified in this material.

Affect (Gottschalk–Gleser)

Affect read from word patterns — anxiety, hostility, and social alienation as they surface in the language.

word count 13anxiety total normalized 11.77

The input consists of 13 single-word responses or prompts with no grammatical clauses, predicate structures, or affective content. Words are all nouns or adjectives denoting concrete objects (Chair, Grass, Ocean, Hair, Boat, Door, Queen), abstract concepts (Courage, Life), or qualities (Nice, Short, Peak). No anxiety indicators, hostility expressions, hope references, social alienation markers, cognitive impairment signs, or other affectively-valenced content is present. All scales normalize to 0. This profile is consistent with minimal or absent emotional disclosure—possible responses to single-word prompts rather than spontaneous narrative.