CYTOG HUMAN FORMATION AND LEARNING
Document Reference: RHF-IN-001 · Stage 6

CYTOG Relational Formation

Assessment Matrix (RFAM)
Derived From: RHF-CSC-001, Part II, Convergence 5 (RHF-RS-001, 004, 005, 006, 007) · Stages 1–2 of 10 · July 2026

Section I

Part I — Purpose and Evidence Base

The Relational Formation Assessment Matrix (RFAM) consolidates the recurring domains identified independently across five person-level assessment matrices built during the eight closed Research Streams: the Relational Formation Matrix (RHF-RS-001), the Blind-Spot Disclosure Matrix (RHF-RS-004), the Self-Loss Assessment Matrix (RHF-RS-005), the Authentic Peace Assessment Matrix (RHF-RS-006), and the Conviction-Preserving Listening Matrix (RHF-RS-007).

SCOPE DECISION: The Relational Systems Assessment Matrix (RHF-RS-008) is deliberately excluded. It assesses institutions, not individuals — a different unit of analysis. RHF-RS-008’s matrix is reserved as the seed of a future, separate Relational Systems Assessment Instrument.

This scope decision refines, rather than simply implements, RHF-CSC-001’s Part V Observation 1, which had flagged all six matrices together without yet distinguishing their units of analysis.

Section II

Part II — The Eight Domains

Each domain below is retained only because it recurred, independently, across two or more of the five source matrices.

1. Voice

Governing Question: Can I express what I genuinely think and feel in this relationship?

Convergent Source Matrices: RHF-RS-005, RHF-RS-006

2. Boundaries

Governing Question: Can I establish and maintain legitimate limits in this relationship?

Convergent Source Matrices: RHF-RS-005, RHF-RS-006

3. Agency

Governing Question: Can I make meaningful decisions and reach independent conclusions without excessive relational fear or pressure?

Convergent Source Matrices: RHF-RS-005, RHF-RS-007

4. Self-Awareness

Governing Question: Do I have an accurate, examined understanding of my own behaviour, patterns, and impact within this relationship?

Convergent Source Matrices: RHF-RS-001, RHF-RS-004, RHF-RS-007

5. Relational Impact

Governing Question: Do I have an accurate understanding of how my behaviour actually affects the other person, distinct from what I intended?

Convergent Source Matrices: RHF-RS-001, RHF-RS-004

6. Truth and Accountability

Governing Question: Can difficult truths be spoken in this relationship, and can harmful behaviour be named and reviewed?

Convergent Source Matrices: RHF-RS-006, RHF-RS-007

7. Repair and Responsibility

Governing Question: When harm or rupture occurs, can each person identify what genuinely belongs to them and participate in meaningful repair?

Convergent Source Matrices: RHF-RS-006, RHF-RS-001/003

8. Pattern Awareness

Governing Question: Do I recognize what keeps repeating across this relationship or across multiple relationships, rather than treating each event in isolation?

Convergent Source Matrices: RHF-RS-001, RHF-RS-004

Section III

Part III — Using RFAM

RFAM is a structured reflective framework, to be worked through domain by domain for a specific relationship or relational pattern under examination. It is not a scored questionnaire. Applying the Theory of Dual-Error Relational Interpretation (RHF-TH-001) is a precondition for using RFAM correctly.

RFAM measures nothing by itself. It structures where to look. The Discernment Function (RHF-TH-001, Part IV) determines whether what is found there is accurate.

Recommended procedure:

  • Identify the specific relationship or relational pattern under examination.
  • Work through all eight domains in order, answering each governing question honestly and specifically.
  • For any domain where a concern surfaces, apply the Discernment Function before drawing a conclusion.
  • Record findings domain by domain rather than forming one global impression.

Section IV

Part IV — Validation Status

Per the ten-stage instrument validation pipeline established for Symbolic Human Formation’s measurement instruments, and adopted here as the applicable Institute-wide standard, RFAM currently stands at Stage 2 of 10.

1. Conceptual Definition — complete

2. Construct Definition — complete

3. Domain Specification — not yet begun

4. Item Development — not yet begun

5. Pilot Testing — not yet begun

6. Reliability Evaluation — not yet begun

7. Validity Evaluation — not yet begun

8. Standardization — not yet begun

9. Application — not yet begun

10. Revision — not yet begun

RFAM is therefore not yet a validated diagnostic instrument, and shall not be represented as one. It has completed Conceptual Definition and Construct Definition. Domain Specification, Item Development, and every subsequent stage remain future, independently justified work.

Section V

Ratification

RFAM is admitted to the Relational Human Formation research architecture as RHF-IN-001, built exclusively from convergent evidence across five closed Research Streams, with its scope deliberately limited to the person-level unit of analysis. It supersedes no prior document and alters no closed stream.