MediaIEU tests provide systemic diagnostics that help understand a person not in isolation, but through their real relationship with the family, company and state. The diagnostics are based on the model developed by Iv.Spolan ( The Fundamental Law of Political Economy ) and examine behaviour, choice, demand, attitudes towards money, expectations, motivation and the influence of the surrounding system on a person’s decisions.
A person never exists separately from the surrounding system. They live in a family, work in a company, are subject to the laws of the state, make financial decisions, build relationships, and face the demands, restrictions and expectations of other people. For this reason, it is not enough to assess a person through a single character trait, several direct questions or an attractive description of personality. MediaIEU tests consider the person together with the systems within which their behaviour, choices, real needs and direction of resources are formed.
Why an ordinary personality description is not enough
Most conventional tests attempt to identify one characteristic: confidence, anxiety, independence, a tendency towards leadership, dependence on the opinions of others or a type of behaviour. As a result, the person receives an attractive label, several general statements and a description in which it is easy to recognise themselves. Yet such recognition does not explain why a person repeats the same decisions for years, chooses unsuitable partners, remains in a destructive working environment or acts against their own interests.
The same personality can behave very differently within different systems. A person may be independent in everyday matters but completely dependent on the family when making important decisions. They may confidently manage other people while fearing any pressure from their own manager. They may criticise the state system while arranging their life in such a way that any change in the rules immediately deprives them of the ability to act. These differences are precisely what become the subject of systemic diagnostics.
What MediaIEU tests actually diagnose
The object of diagnosis is always the person. The test examines neither an abstract family, nor a legal entity, nor the state apparatus, but the position of a specific participant within the relevant system. It analyses how the person acts, makes decisions, responds to pressure, manages resources, understands their own needs and interacts with other participants. In group tests, several people are compared, but each participant retains a separate profile, a separate role and their own structure of results.
Depending on the subject, MediaIEU tests can show independence, confidence, dependence on the opinions of others, the ability to make decisions, a person’s position within the family, relationships with a manager, the condition of an employee within a team, trust in the state system or dependence on it. The result is not reduced to a statement that the person is “good”, “bad”, “strong” or “weak”. The diagnostics show exactly where a restriction arises and how one part of the system affects another.
The Iv.Spolan model as the basis of diagnostics
MediaIEU tests are created on the basis of the Iv.Spolan model:
Personality → Behaviour → Choice → Demand → Money
Money → Direction of Money → Form of the System
Form of the System → Demand → Choice → Behaviour → Personality
This sequence shows that a person does not merely respond to external circumstances. Their behaviour forms choice, choice creates demand, demand directs money, and the direction of money gradually forms the system within which the person is then compelled to live and act.
The movement also takes place in the opposite direction. The formed system begins to restrict or expand the options available to the person, affects their needs, forces them to change decisions, restructures behaviour and gradually influences the Personality itself. Systemic diagnostics therefore do not search for one magical cause of every problem. They analyse the sequence of connections and determine where a person’s understanding ceases to become action, where a decision diverges from a need, or where resources begin to work against the stated objective.
The four sectors of MediaIEU tests
The internal structure of the tests is built around four sectors: Bh — Behaviour, Ch — Choice, Dm — Demand and Mn — Money. These sectors are not four independent assessments that can simply be added together to produce an average result. They represent consecutive parts of a single system through which the person’s impulse passes. What matters is not only the value of each sector, but also how consistently movement occurs between them.
A person may understand a situation well but fail to act. They may act confidently while choosing a direction under the influence of other people. They may state a particular need while directing money, time and attention in the opposite direction. From the outside, these situations can appear similar: the person is dissatisfied with the result and does not understand why nothing changes. Systemic diagnostics show, however, that the causes may lie in entirely different sectors and require different explanations.
The Behaviour sector
The Behaviour sector shows how a person acts in real circumstances rather than how they describe themselves. People often consider themselves decisive, independent and consistent until a situation requires them to refuse someone close to them, enter into conflict with a manager, accept financial risk or take responsibility for the consequences. It is in such circumstances that the person’s actual model of behaviour appears rather than their stated position, and this model may be repeated in different areas of life.
Behaviour is considered through specific situations, restrictions and reactions. The test checks whether the person acts after making a decision, avoids uncomfortable steps, postpones change, waits for permission, adapts to pressure or attempts to preserve their own direction. A single answer does not determine the result. What matters is the recurrence of a model across different questions, because a chance reaction and a stable way of behaving are fundamentally different phenomena.
The Choice sector
The Choice sector shows how a person compares options, makes decisions and evaluates possible consequences. The mere fact of making a choice does not yet mean independence. A decision may be made out of fear, under pressure from the family, for the approval of a manager, from concern about losing income or simply because the majority acts in the same way. Outwardly, the person has made a choice, but internally they may have abandoned their own understanding of the situation and transferred direction to another participant.
The test makes it possible to see whether the person can maintain a chosen direction after doubts, criticism or new circumstances appear. It analyses the extent to which they depend on advice, fear making a mistake, transfer responsibility, compare options endlessly or make hasty decisions in order to escape tension more quickly. The Choice sector is particularly important in cases where a person understands everything but remains unable for years to turn that understanding into a stable decision.
The Demand sector
The Demand sector shows a person’s real needs rather than only their publicly stated wishes. People often say that they need stability, freedom, a serious relationship, professional growth or financial independence. Yet their repeated decisions may create the exact opposite result. A person may seek stability while constantly choosing risk, strive for freedom while creating new dependencies, or speak about development while directing all their effort towards preserving their familiar position.
For this reason, the test does not accept every statement made by the participant as the final truth. Answers are compared with one another, considered in different circumstances and connected with behaviour, choice and money. If a declared objective constantly diverges from actual decisions, the diagnostics reveal this discrepancy. Demand in the MediaIEU system means the direction that the person genuinely supports through their actions, expectations and repeated preferences.
The Money sector
The Money sector shows more than a level of income or the size of savings. It reflects the person’s attitude towards resources, obligations, property, risk, expenditure, the cost of decisions and financial dependence. In this context, money is a form of confirmation of choice. A person may speak extensively about priorities, but it is the distribution of resources that shows which decisions they actually support and which exist only as intentions or attractive explanations.
Resources include not only money in the direct sense, but also time, attention, energy, available opportunities and the ability to abandon something less important for the sake of what matters most. A person may state that they seek independence while continuing to finance dependence. They may speak about professional growth while allocating neither time nor money to it. The Money sector helps to show where the movement of the person’s system is actually directed.
Why balance between the sectors matters
A high value in one sector does not in itself guarantee a stable result. A person may possess a strong capacity for analysis and choice but fail to proceed to action. They may be active and decisive while directing that activity towards objectives that do not correspond to their real needs. They may earn well while using money in such a way that the financial system gradually restricts their freedom and increases their dependence.
MediaIEU tests therefore analyse not only separate indicators but also the transitions between sectors. The main problem is often located precisely at the connection between two parts of the system. Choice does not move into Behaviour, Demand does not determine Choice, Money does not support Demand, or the direction of resources begins to form behaviour that the person did not originally intend. This approach explains the mechanism of the problem rather than merely recording the existence of dissatisfaction.
The SBR Sector Balance Ratio
The SBR Sector Balance Ratio shows how closely the neighbouring sectors correspond: Behaviour and Choice, Choice and Demand, Demand and Money, and Money and Behaviour. A value close to one indicates a more even connection between two parts of the system. A substantial reduction shows that one sector is considerably ahead of the other and that the impulse does not pass onward in full.
SBR is not an assessment of human worth and does not divide people into right and wrong. It identifies the location of a systemic rupture. For example, a person may make sufficiently independent decisions but almost never implement them. Another participant may act actively while constantly choosing a direction formed by external pressure. In both cases, the overall result may look similar, but the structure of the problem and the conclusions required will be different.
What SEII-P shows
SEII-P is used to assess the position of the Personality and the level of pressure arising within its Protective Shell. The index must not be considered separately from the remaining data. The same final value for two participants may be formed by completely different causes. For one person, the principal restriction may be connected with behaviour; for another, with choice; for a third, with real needs; and for a fourth, with financial dependence and the direction of resources.
The SEII-P result is therefore considered together with the Bh, Ch, Dm and Mn sectors, the SBR ratios, the question cycles and recurring patterns in the answers. The final report must explain not only the value of the result but also its internal structure. An index without analysis of the connections would become merely another attractive number that creates an impression but does not help to explain the person’s actual position.
The person within the family
The family is the first system within which habits, roles, responsibility, attitudes towards money, methods of resolving conflict and ideas about acceptable behaviour are formed. Even an adult may continue to make decisions under the influence of family expectations, a sense of duty, fear of condemnation or dependence on support. The family theme in MediaIEU tests is therefore considered not as an attempt to declare the family healthy or unhealthy, but as an analysis of the position of a specific person.
Several members of a family may participate in a test. In such a case, the answers of each participant, the differences between their positions, the distribution of responsibility, conflicting expectations and recurring interaction models are assessed. One person may believe that decisions are made jointly, while another experiences the same relationship as pressure. One may speak about equality, while the other constantly bears the main financial and emotional burden. The diagnostics make such discrepancies visible.
The person within the company
A company creates its own system of roles, subordination, financial dependence, responsibility and control. An employee’s behaviour within it may differ greatly from their behaviour outside work. A person who confidently makes personal decisions may completely lose independence before management. Another employee may argue openly while avoiding any responsibility for the final result. The diagnostics therefore consider not the company as an organism, but the person within the working structure.
In a group test, the manager, subordinates, differences between roles and relationships between employees are analysed. Particular attention is given to how the participants understand duties, power, fairness, responsibility and the causes of conflict. Such analysis may show that an open dispute is only the final stage of a deeper discrepancy between the manager’s choices, the employees’ behaviour, the group’s real demand and the direction of the company’s resources.
The person within the state
The state creates the broadest system of rules, restrictions and opportunities. It affects property rights, employment, taxation, education, healthcare, security, social support and freedom of movement. MediaIEU tests do not, however, diagnose the state or attempt to declare the entire system effective or ineffective on the basis of one person’s answers. The diagnostics show how a specific person perceives the state environment and what position they occupy within it.
A test may reveal trust in the system, dependence on state decisions, fear of changes to rules, the ability to defend one’s rights, readiness to make independent decisions and the influence of the external environment on personal choice. External pressure from the state environment is assessed separately through the SEII-C calculation for a country and the connected external indices. The person’s test and the calculation of the environment are not mixed, because personal perception of the system and its measurable external characteristics represent different levels of analysis.
The six categories of MediaIEU tests
MediaIEU tests are divided into six categories:
- Personality;
- Behaviour;
- Choice;
- Demand;
- Money;
- Form of the System.
Each category determines the central subject of the study but does not cancel the analysis of the remaining parts of the model. A Choice test, for example, cannot completely ignore Behaviour, because a decision must be compared with actual actions. A Money test is not limited to counting expenditure, because the direction of resources is connected with Demand and forms the future system. The category identifies the central question rather than isolating one indicator from the person’s entire structure.
The category “Form of the System” also does not mean diagnosing the family, company or state as an independent object. It shows how the arrangement of the system acts upon the person: which rules support them, which restrictions increase pressure, how closely the distribution of roles corresponds to the actual position, and whether the participant can preserve their own direction. The Personality remains at the centre of the test even when the main subject concerns the external structure.
Why the tests contain many questions
Several direct questions cannot reliably determine a stable model. When asked about independence, a person often answers according to their idea of themselves rather than according to their actual actions. They may sincerely consider themselves independent because they choose their own clothes or plan a holiday, while completely transferring decisions about work, relationships, money, place of residence and the future to other people.
The same subject is therefore tested through different circumstances, roles and forms of pressure. The questions address everyday decisions, conflict, financial obligations, fear of loss, relationships with people close to the participant, subordination, responsibility and consequences. When one model is repeated in different situations, it becomes visible. The large volume of the test is not intended to create artificial complexity, but to separate a chance answer from a stable structure of behaviour and choice.
Why the answer options are mixed
Answer options are not arranged according to a pattern in which the first is always the strongest and the last the weakest. Their order changes from one question to another, while the internal weight remains the same regardless of the option’s position in the list. The participant must not be able to guess the desired answer from its placement, because the test would then begin to measure the ability to recognise a pattern rather than the person’s actual attitude towards the situation.
Mixing the options does not remove every possible distortion, but it reduces the probability of mechanical completion. The person must read the content of every option and relate it to their own behaviour. In addition, the same subject is considered through different formulations, so an attempt to select socially attractive answers consistently creates internal contradictions. These contradictions also become part of the analysis and do not disappear inside a simple total score.
How the final report is prepared
The final report must not be an automatic release of several phrases after scores have been calculated. Its preparation includes analysis of the participant’s answers, distribution across the Bh, Ch, Dm and Mn sectors, recurring models, question cycles, SBR ratios, SEII-P indicators, internal contradictions and the influence of the external environment. It is important to identify not only the weak point, but also the sequence through which it affects the remaining parts of the system.
In a group study, the overall profile, differences between participants, relationships between roles and differences in the perception of the same situation are also considered. A manager may believe that employees are given freedom, while the employees experience the manager’s actions as constant control. Family members may all speak about mutual support while understanding responsibility in completely different ways. The report must reveal these discrepancies and explain from which answers and connections they were formed.
MediaIEU tests do not predict the future
MediaIEU tests do not tell fortunes, read auras, communicate with the cosmos, search for signs of destiny or promise to name the exact date of a future event. They do not say when a person will meet love, become rich, lose a job or move to another country. The future is not extracted from cards, coffee grounds, the positions of planets, lines on a palm, a date of birth or the confident voice of someone who has declared themselves the possessor of a special gift.
Diagnostics can show the direction formed by current behaviour, choice, demand and money. This is not prophecy, but an analysis of a sequence that already exists. If a person constantly avoids decisions, depends on external approval and directs resources against their own objective, it is possible to explain why their position is unlikely to change unless this structure changes. The test does not, however, transform the probable continuation of an existing model into mystical knowledge about the future.
Why predictors turn to MediaIEU tests and lectures
Many people who publicly describe themselves as psychics, predictors, astrologers or tarot readers also use systemic analysis, study MediaIEU lectures and order our tests. The reason is simple: cards, symbols, general statements about destiny and conversations about energy are not enough when a client asks specific questions about family, work, money, relationships, dependence, choice or their own future.
A person does not come only for an attractive story about what awaits them. They are trying to understand why they repeatedly choose the same kind of relationship, cannot leave an unsuitable job, depend on the family’s opinion, fear a manager, make decisions against their own interests or constantly direct money towards areas that do not improve their position. Such questions cannot be answered meaningfully through cards, a horoscope or a claimed ability to see the future alone.
This is why some predictors begin to use MediaIEU tests as an additional instrument. Systemic diagnostics provide them with a structure that fortune-telling does not possess: the person’s answers, distribution across sectors, recurring models, SBR ratios, SEII-P indicators and the connections between Behaviour, Choice, Demand and Money. The explanation then becomes more substantial because it begins to rely not only on symbols but also on the participant’s actual data.
When analysis is presented as a supernatural prediction
By carefully examining a person’s behaviour, decisions, dependencies and direction of resources, it is genuinely possible to determine the most likely continuation of the current situation. If a person constantly avoids responsibility, transfers choice to others, fears change and directs no resources towards the stated objective, it is reasonable to suppose that their position will remain unchanged unless this structure changes. No mystical gift is required for such a conclusion. A consistent analysis of existing patterns is sufficient.
The problem begins when ordinary analysis is presented as information obtained from another world. A predictor may first collect information about the person, study their reactions, ask leading questions, use a test or read our lectures, and then present the result as a vision, a message from energy or special knowledge. The client does not understand that the conclusion was formed from their own answers and observable behaviour.
MediaIEU operates according to the opposite principle. Every conclusion must have a comprehensible basis. If the report refers to dependence on the family, this must be confirmed by the participant’s answers. If a rupture between Choice and Behaviour is identified, it must be visible in the calculations and recurring models. If the data are insufficient, the gap must not be filled with an attractive invention and presented as an exact result.
Using the MediaIEU method does not confirm a special gift
A predictor, astrologer or tarot reader may order a MediaIEU test, purchase lectures and use the acquired knowledge in their work. This is not prohibited and is not in itself a problem. Our materials may be studied by many different people: consultants, managers, teachers, researchers, psychologists, business owners and representatives of fields associated with prediction. Access to MediaIEU tests and lectures does not depend on a person’s profession, area of activity or personal beliefs.
Using MediaIEU tests does not, however, turn an external consultant into a representative of MediaIEU and does not confirm claims of supernatural abilities. If a conclusion is made on the basis of a test, answers and the sector structure, it is a result of systemic analysis. If the same conclusion is presented to the client as a message from higher powers, the matter no longer concerns the MediaIEU method but the way in which the information is presented.
It is especially important to distinguish the source of a conclusion. It is one thing to tell a person that preserving the current model of behaviour is highly likely to lead to particular consequences. It is quite another to claim that these consequences have already been seen and will certainly occur. In the first case, a causal connection is explained to the person. In the second, they are placed in dependence on someone who supposedly possesses access to hidden knowledge.
Why predictors speak with confidence
A predictor sells not only information but also a feeling of certainty. The person arrives in a state of doubt, fear, emotional tension or internal conflict. In response, they receive a simple story in which the causes, those responsible, the timing and future events have already been assigned. Such a story provides temporary reassurance because it removes the need to analyse the situation independently, make a decision and accept responsibility for the consequences.
The more confidently a prediction is expressed, the more strongly it may be perceived as truth. Statements about an inevitable meeting, an approaching separation, an envious person, blocked energy, an ancestral block or an important turning point create an impression of precision, although they often remain general enough to suit a large number of people. After an event, any wording can be interpreted again and presented as a fulfilled prediction.
Systemic diagnostics must not create false certainty. They must show which data support a conclusion, where probability exists and where information is insufficient. Sometimes the result is less pleasant than a story about destiny. It may show that the problem is connected not with external energy but with the person’s recurring choice, financial dependence, fear of responsibility or inability to act after making a decision.
Astrology, cards and other forms of guessing
A date of birth may be used to determine age and the historical moment into which a person was born. The date itself does not, however, prove that the positions of planets govern their decisions, relationships, income or professional future. Similarly, a card drawn from a deck does not measure sector balance, dependence on a manager, the stability of choice or the direction of money.
A symbol can be interpreted in dozens of ways. Its meaning is often adjusted to the client’s reaction, facts that are already known and the direction of the conversation. The impression of accuracy may therefore arise after information has been obtained rather than before it. The more a person says about themselves, the easier it becomes to form a description that appears surprisingly personal and precise.
MediaIEU does not use symbols as a substitute for data. If a test shows financial dependence, this must be confirmed by the answers and the structure of the Mn sector. If a discrepancy between Behaviour and Choice is identified, it must be visible in repeated questions and the SBR calculation. If no such connection exists, it must not be invented merely because an impressive story sounds more convincing than an honest absence of a result.
Why systemic diagnostics are not prediction
MediaIEU tests do not name the date of a future event, the name of a future partner, the exact amount of future income, the moment of dismissal or the day of relocation. They show the person’s current position and the direction formed by their behaviour, choice, real needs, money and external conditions. If this structure remains unchanged, particular consequences genuinely become more likely.
Probability is not destiny. A person may make a new decision, change behaviour, redistribute resources, leave a dependency or alter their relationship with the system. Other participants may also change their actions. A company may replace its management, a family may change the distribution of responsibility, and a state may change its rules and conditions. The future is therefore not considered a result that has already been written.
Prediction tells a person that the future has supposedly already been determined and that they only need to wait for the stated event. Systemic diagnostics show what future is being created by the actions taking place now. They do not deprive the person of the possibility of choice. On the contrary, they show which internal and external factors restrict that choice and why the current system continues to reproduce the same result.
Why we do not promise absolute truth
Systemic diagnostics have their own limitations. The result depends on the quality of the questions, the accuracy of the calculation, the sincerity of the answers and the completeness of the analysis. A person may conceal information, misunderstand their own behaviour, answer in a socially acceptable manner or describe themselves differently from the way they act in reality. The test result is therefore not declared an absolute truth and does not become a final judgement.
It is precisely the recognition of limitations that distinguishes analysis from fortune-telling. A predictor can almost always explain why a forecast did not come true: the energy changed, another person interfered, the client did not believe strongly enough or the timing of the event shifted. In systemic diagnostics, insufficient data must be called insufficient data, an error must be called an error, and an assumption must be called an assumption.
A confident tone does not replace an evidential connection between the participant’s answers and the conclusions of the report. MediaIEU must not create an impression of omniscience. The value of the method lies not in a promise never to be wrong, but in the ability to show the structure of the result, verify the origin of the conclusion and separate an established pattern from a probable interpretation.
What MediaIEU tests are not
MediaIEU tests are not fortune-telling, horoscopes, card reading, a search for energy blocks, contact with higher powers or a way of determining a person’s destiny. They do not promise to reveal everything that will happen in the future and do not create dependence on someone who supposedly has the ability to see hidden events. The result is built from the participant’s answers, calculations, sectors and the connections between them.
MediaIEU tests are also not medical diagnostics and do not replace a doctor, psychiatrist, psychologist, lawyer, financial adviser or another specialist. A systemic report must not assign clinical diagnoses to a person, identify illnesses or go beyond the data obtained within the specific study.
The test result is not an order. It shows the person’s current position, internal discrepancies, recurring models and the influence of the family, company or state. The final decision remains with the participant. Diagnostics must not become another external system that deprives the person of independence and dictates exactly how they must live.
Why a person needs systemic diagnostics
Most problems become visible only at the final stage. A family conflict is noticed after a serious argument, a problem within a company after dismissals or a decline in results, and dependence on the state after a change in the law or the withdrawal of support. Yet before an open crisis, behaviour, choice, needs and the direction of money are already changing. Internal discrepancies begin to accumulate before the person notices their obvious consequences.
MediaIEU tests are intended to identify these changes. They show how a person acts now, why they make particular decisions, where the connection between sectors is disrupted and how the family, company or state affects their position. Such a result does not require stories about a secret future, because the basis of the next stage of life is already being formed in the present.
This is why even people working in the field of prediction turn to MediaIEU tests and lectures. For a meaningful answer, they need data, structure and a comprehensible causal connection. A claim of possessing a special gift is not enough when it is necessary to explain a person’s actual position. The MediaIEU method does not guess the future — it shows the system of decisions and actions that gradually forms the most probable further direction.
Iv.Spolan
Author of the model “Basic Law of Political Economy”
