🎯 Satisfaction Analysis

What makes a session great? Regression analysis, interaction effects, and sweet spots.

Generated October 3, 2026 · 189 sessions · avg 8.7/10

8.7
Mean Satisfaction
5.7%
Variance Explained (R²)
Depth
Top Predictor
9.17
Top 20% Avg
8.08
Bottom 20% Avg

💡 Recommendations

🏆 Ambition is the biggest differentiator: top sessions avg 83 vs bottom 63 (Δ+19)
🤝 Maximize productivity and flow together — they have synergy (both high → 8.7/10 avg satisfaction)
📈 Recently, consistency and variety drive satisfaction most (phase R²=0.21)
🎯 Keep depth in the 100-100 range (avg sat 8.8/10 there, r=+0.175)

📊 What Predicts Satisfaction?

Stepwise regression adds components by marginal R² contribution. Higher bars = more unique predictive power after accounting for other components.

Depth
ΔR²=0.031
r=+0.175
Flow
ΔR²=0.026
r=-0.147

Note: Only components with ΔR² ≥ 0.005 are shown. Correlation (r) shows raw relationship; ΔR² shows unique explanatory power after accounting for other predictors.

🎯 Sweet Spots

Optimal ranges for each DNA component that maximize satisfaction. Based on sliding window analysis across all sessions.

Productivity

95–100 → 8.8/10
r = +0.081
8.6
8.8
8.6
8.8
8.7
8.5

Ambition

33–50 → 8.8/10
r = -0.027
8.8
8.7
8.7
8.6
8.8
8.3

Depth

100–100 → 8.8/10
r = +0.175
8.6
8.7
8.9
8.6
8.7
9.6

Growth

100–100 → 8.8/10
r = +0.000
8.8
8.7
8.7
8.6
8.7
9.6

Variety

94–100 → 8.9/10
r = +0.104
8.6
8.7
8.6
8.9
8.7
9.0

Flow

55–73 → 8.9/10
r = -0.147
8.7
8.8
8.7
8.6
8.6
8.6

Consistency

68–76 → 8.8/10
r = -0.131
8.8
8.8
8.7
8.7
8.6
8.8

🏆 Top 20% vs Bottom 20%

DNA profile comparison between the 37 highest-satisfaction sessions (avg 9.17/10) and 37 lowest (avg 8.08/10).

Ambition
83
63
▲ 19 (d=+0.79)
Flow
66
73
▼ 7 (d=-0.45)
Variety
95
88
▲ 6 (d=+0.58)
Productivity
91
86
▲ 5 (d=+0.40)
Consistency
78
75
▲ 3 (d=+0.29)
Depth
98
96
▲ 2 (d=+0.46)
Growth
100
100
▲ 0 (d=+0.00)

🔀 Interaction Effects

How pairs of DNA components interact to affect satisfaction. Synergy means both high is better than expected; antagonism means they work against each other.

⚔️ Productivity × Variety -0.27
Both ↑ 8.7 n=89
Productivity↑ Variety↓ 8.7 n=43
Productivity↓ Variety↑ 8.8 n=25
Both ↓ 8.6 n=32
🤝 Productivity × Flow +0.22
Both ↑ 8.7 n=68
Productivity↑ Flow↓ 8.7 n=64
Productivity↓ Flow↑ 8.6 n=30
Both ↓ 8.8 n=27
🤝 Ambition × Consistency +0.18
Both ↑ 8.7 n=86
Ambition↑ Consistency↓ 8.7 n=10
Ambition↓ Consistency↑ 8.6 n=10
Both ↓ 8.7 n=83
🤝 Ambition × Flow +0.17
Both ↑ 8.7 n=46
Ambition↑ Flow↓ 8.7 n=50
Ambition↓ Flow↑ 8.6 n=52
Both ↓ 8.8 n=41
⚔️ Variety × Flow -0.17
Both ↑ 8.6 n=52
Variety↑ Flow↓ 8.8 n=62
Variety↓ Flow↑ 8.7 n=46
Both ↓ 8.7 n=29
🤝 Flow × Consistency +0.17
Both ↑ 8.7 n=52
Flow↑ Consistency↓ 8.6 n=46
Flow↓ Consistency↑ 8.7 n=44
Both ↓ 8.8 n=47

📈 How Satisfaction Drivers Change Over Time

Sessions split into three phases. Satisfaction drivers shift as the practice matures.

Early

S6-S92
8.67/10 R²=0.12
① Depth ② Ambition
Prod
+0.06
Ambi
+0.22
Dept
+0.29
Grow
+0.00
Vari
+0.10
Flow
-0.15
Cons
+0.13

Middle

S93-S155
8.71/10 R²=0.07
① Consistency ② Productivity ③ Flow
Prod
+0.11
Ambi
-0.13
Dept
+0.00
Grow
+0.00
Vari
+0.01
Flow
-0.21
Cons
-0.21

Recent

S156-S235
8.71/10 R²=0.21
① Consistency ② Variety ③ Productivity
Prod
+0.15
Ambi
-0.30
Dept
+0.10
Grow
+0.00
Vari
+0.25
Flow
-0.14
Cons
-0.41

📂 By Category

revision

9.05/10 n=4 ±0.66

building

8.71/10 n=75 ±0.4
Top driver: Flow (R²=0.17)

mixed

8.7/10 n=91 ±0.46
Top driver: Depth (R²=0.06)

writing

8.55/10 n=19 ±0.36
Top driver: Depth (R²=0.36)