Legal
© 2026 Feels Co.

Hand pointing up icon Summary & key points

It’s time to go beyond legacy methods of detecting plagiarism or AI-generated content. The Linguistic Fingerprint™ by LINGA is a revolutionary language analysis technology that sits at the intersection of linguistics, psychology, and computer science. It’s an entirely new way of identifying a person in the form-factors of speech and writing. Linguistic self-discovery awaits.
Feels Score: 9 in

Hand pointing up icon Summary & key points

On February 13, 2005, superstar rapper Kanye West won a Grammy award at the 47th Grammy Awards for Best Rap Album as a result of his previously released album called College Dropout (2004). Kanye approached the podium to deliver his acceptance speech in a white outfit, and proceeded to give thanks to several individuals. The highlight of his speech was at the end when Kanye announced "everybody wanted to know what I would do if I didn't win. I guess we'll never know." Overall, the speech was brief, lacked details, and ended on a cliffhanger about what he would do. Kanye West's reluctance to share more information demonstrate a below-average example of the Volubility attribute.
Feels Score: 4 in

Hand pointing up icon Summary & key points

In the cult classic movie American Psycho (2000), Christian Bale portrays Patrick Bateman, a big-shot New York City investment banker who goes on a literal killing spree. After avoiding capture throughout the film, Patrick is sitting at the bar with his coworkers while the television is playing in the background. Bateman delivers the movie's closing with an intense monologue that describes the horrific things he has done, and how he has little remorse. Despite Bateman's cruel behavior, he discusses his feelings and those of others in vivid detail insofar as it matters to him. Bateman's comments about the emotional states of others demonstrate an average example of the Emotion attribute.
Feels Score: 5 in

Hand pointing up icon Summary & key points

On September 14, 2023, UFC boss Dana White joined the famous UK broadcaster Piers Morgan for an interview on Morgan's YouTube channel, Piers Morgan Uncensored ("Piers Morgan vs Dana White | The Full Interview"). Morgan began asking Dana questions about his parents and upbringing, a topic that Dana usually avoids. As the questions became more personal, Dana politely set clear boundaries by shying away from certain details. For example, Dana disclosed that his parents recently passed away, but avoided providing specific dates or details. This is unlike the UFC boss who, having done many press conferences, is trained in and comfortable with sharing precise numbers and facts. The topic was exhausted when Dana remarked that the questions reminded Morgan of his own wife. Dana White's reluctance to provide precise information about his relationship with his own parents demonstrates a below-average example of the Specificity attribute.
Feels Score: 4 in

Hand pointing up icon Summary & key points

In the hit movie The Wolf of Wall Street (2013), successful financer Jordan Belfort finds himself on his own boat being visited by FBI agents for financial crimes of a criminal nature. Very serious. He cordially invites them up to his boat and engages in 15 minutes of conversation warm up before the two agents and the focused-eyed Belfort begin to talk about brass tax. Belfort suggests, in so few words, that he is willing to do anything within his power to make peoples' lives better, including applying his experience and money. The FBI agent interprets this as a clear bribe, and breaks protocol by asking Jordan to repeat it again because he believes that Jordan has incriminated himself terribly. Comedic dialogue proceeds thereafter. Belfort’s knowledge of the law seemingly influenced his lack of details for how the crime would work in a logistical manner, which would constitute evidence of committing a bribery crime.  Belfort's selective word choices intended to dilute clarity in order to avoid self-incrimination demonstrate communication well below average in the Specificity attribute.
Feels Score: 2 in
Feels – Laugh. Learn. Language™

Hand pointing up icon Summary & key points

Feels – Psycholinguistics made simple. Our mission is to promote objective analysis of real 🗣️human language via fun, short videos and the 🪄magic of psycholinguistics. We do this by organizing, analyzing, and making freely available a growing collection of Feels, or highly structured short-form videos that explain the contents of a given conversation between two or more people. Plus GIFs.

Ultra Low

0–5% percentile
An ultra low attribute score is exceptionally rare because it represents 5% of the entire population. In a room with 100 other people, a person with an ultra low attribute score would be lower than 95 of them and higher than none of them.
Note: Feels uses a 9-point scoring scale that ranges from Ultra Low to Ultra High according to a normal distribution. See our methodology.

Very Low

5–10% percentile
A very low attribute score is rare because it represents 5% of the entire population. In a room with 100 other people, a person with a very low attribute score would be higher than five of them and lower than 90 of them.
Note: Feels uses a 9-point scoring scale that ranges from Ultra Low to Ultra High according to a normal distribution. See our methodology.

Low

10–20% percentile
A low attribute score is somewhat uncommon and represents 10% of the entire population. In a room with 100 other people, a person with a low attribute score would be higher than ten of them and lower than 80 of them.
Note: Feels uses a 9-point scoring scale that ranges from Ultra Low to Ultra High according to a normal distribution. See our methodology.

Slightly Low

20–40% percentile
A slightly low attribute score is common and represents 20% of the entire population. In a room with 100 other people, a person with a slightly low attribute score would be higher than 20 of them and lower than 60 of them.
Note: Feels uses a 9-point scoring scale that ranges from Ultra Low to Ultra High according to a normal distribution. See our methodology.

Average

40–60% percentile
An average attribute score is typical and represents 20% of the entire population. In a room with 100 other people, a person with an average attribute score would be higher than 40 of them and lower than 40 of them.
Note: Feels uses a 9-point scoring scale that ranges from Ultra Low to Ultra High according to a normal distribution. See our methodology.

Slightly High

60–80% percentile
A slightly high attribute score is common and represents 20% of the entire population. In a room with 100 other people, a person with a slightly high attribute score would be higher than 60 of them and lower than 20 of them.
Note: Feels uses a 9-point scoring scale that ranges from Ultra Low to Ultra High according to a normal distribution. See our methodology.

High

80–90% percentile
A high attribute score is somewhat uncommon and represents 10% of the entire population. In a room with 100 other people, a person with a high attribute score would be higher than 80 of them and lower than 10 of them.
Note: Feels uses a 9-point scoring scale that ranges from Ultra Low to Ultra High according to a normal distribution. See our methodology.

Very High

90–95% percentile
A very high attribute score is rare because it represents 5% of the entire population. In a room with 100 other people, a person with a very high attribute score would be higher than 90 of them and lower than five of them.
Note: Feels uses a 9-point scoring scale that ranges from Ultra Low to Ultra High according to a normal distribution. See our methodology.

Ultra High

95–100% percentile
An ultra high attribute score is exceptionally rare because it represents 5% of the entire population. In a room with 100 other people, a person with an ultra high attribute score would be higher than 95 of them and lower than none of them.
Note: Feels uses a 9-point scoring scale that ranges from Ultra Low to Ultra High according to a normal distribution. See our methodology.