Authoritarianism Scale (F-Scale) Test
How the Scales are Structured
Who Usually Takes This Test?
See How You Compare
Below is a preview of how scores are typically distributed across each scale.
Once you complete the test, your result will appear on the scale so you can see how you compare.
Once you complete the test, your result will appear on the scale so you can see how you compare.
Once you complete the test, your result will appear on the scale so you can see how you compare.
Once you complete the test, your result will appear on the scale so you can see how you compare.
Once you complete the test, your result will appear on the scale so you can see how you compare.
Once you complete the test, your result will appear on the scale so you can see how you compare.
Once you complete the test, your result will appear on the scale so you can see how you compare.
Once you complete the test, your result will appear on the scale so you can see how you compare.
Once you complete the test, your result will appear on the scale so you can see how you compare.
Once you complete the test, your result will appear on the scale so you can see how you compare.
Frequently Asked Questions
Authoritarianism Scale (F-Scale) Test - Symptoms and Signs
Developed in the mid-20th century, the Authoritarianism Scale (F-Scale) is a self-report questionnaire designed to assess attitudes and response patterns associated with authoritarian-oriented thinking and preferences for social conformity and hierarchy. It is most commonly used in educational and research contexts to characterize individual differences in ideological and personality-related attitudes (R. Nevitt Sanford; Else Frenkel-Brunswik; Daniel J. Levinson; Theodor W. Adorno). The measure includes 28 items and typically requires about 6 minutes to complete.
Items are presented as statements endorsed to varying degrees, yielding a summary of the respondent’s level of agreement with themes often linked to authoritarian dispositions. The Authoritarianism Scale (F-Scale) has also been discussed in the literature with respect to historical context, conceptual specificity, and potential response-style or content-related limitations; interpretation is therefore generally framed cautiously and in conjunction with other data sources when used for psychological assessment.