TEG-BlueThe person names their own action without needing another person to approve it.
How Do They Handle Boundaries?
Compare how one person sets limits and responds when you say no.
Read more
Use what you have seen across several situations, including what followed their first reaction. In each row, choose the closest description or leave the row without a selection.
Select a title to choose an answer; select it again to clear it. Use “Read explanations” to open all three explanations for a question.
0 of 6 selected
Limits leave room for choice
Defence delays clarity
Pressure is used to get agreement
When they set a limit
Tension, distance, or confusion comes first; later they explain some of what is changing.
They threaten to reveal private information or withhold someone’s belongings unless the person does what they want.
When you ask what the limit means
You can understand what will change without having to approve the limit.
Defence interrupts the answer; some practical clarity follows the first reaction.
A practical question brings insults, threats, or penalties.
When you say no to them
Disappointment or disagreement can remain without changing your answer for you.
Argument, repeated requests, or distance comes first; the pressure later stops.
Threats, blame, or pressure continue after your no until you change your answer.
When they pause a conversation you both want to continue
They say when the conversation will continue, then address what remained unresolved.
They stop speaking or leave without a next step; later they address part of the unresolved issue.
They say they will discuss the issue only if you withdraw your concern or take all the blame.
When something they did still needs an answer
Protecting a need does not stop them naming what they did or addressing its effect.
Defence or distance comes first; later they acknowledge part of their action while leaving part unaddressed.
They call insults or threats a boundary and say you caused them by not doing what they asked.
What makes the response stop
It works through the action they take, not through another person’s apology or compliance.
They can later name what they need and address what was left unresolved.
Threats or penalties stop only after you agree, apologise, or do what they asked.
Rows without a selected answer do not count as evidence.
Keep in view
Words, actions, and what changes
When you are looking at someone else’s repeated behavior, these distinctions matter.
A no can stand without a threat.
Each person can act on their own limit. Look at whether the person respects that choice, clarifies what changed, and addresses what they did without making agreement the price of ending pressure.
What happened to you matters
Their intention or explanation may add context. It does not erase how their actions affected you.
Look for what changes
Words matter when they are followed by responsibility, respect for your experience and limits, care, and different behavior over time.
Repetition is information
When the same harm or pressure continues, repeated behavior tells you more than promises, apologies, or claims of understanding.
Quick answers
Does a boundary have to be approved by the other person?
No. A person can decline an activity, leave or end contact without agreement. Shared responsibilities may still need a practical arrangement. A request for relevant practical information is different from demanding that they justify their right to say no.
Is contact conditional on changed behaviour always punishment?
No. Someone can require insults, violence or another harmful behaviour to stop before considering contact. Nobody owes renewed contact or affection. Look for threats, humiliation or unrelated penalties used to demand obedience, rather than treating every condition as control.
Does an unclear limit establish manipulation?
No. An unclear explanation may leave practical arrangements unresolved without establishing a motive. Select what you observed; if the description does not fit or the outcome is unknown, use the uncertainty option.
Can responsibility be addressed without a conversation?
Yes. Returning property, paying a debt or correcting information may be possible through another arrangement. Taking responsibility does not require direct contact, reconciliation or an unsafe conversation.
Why does the tool ask what happens when a limit is crossed?
It distinguishes action that addresses the crossing, an unclear next step and additional humiliation or retaliation. Leaving or ending an activity can enforce a boundary without imposing an unrelated penalty.
Do I need to test the person’s response?
No. Use situations you already know. You can leave uncertainty visible, take a threat seriously and seek support without confronting the person or arranging another encounter.