Home1
Psychological tests2
Comprehensive Coping Inventory (CCI-55)3

Comprehensive Coping Inventory (CCI-55) Test

This 55-question assessment takes about 11 minutes. The Comprehensive Coping Inventory (CCI-55) Test highlights recurring patterns in worry, rumination, avoidance, self-blame, and emotional responses to stress, helping you recognize how you typically handle difficult experiences and identify areas for thoughtful self-reflection.

Questions: 5511 minutes

Comprehensive Coping Inventory (CCI-55) Test: agreement scale card

October 2, 2025October 2, 2025Material has been updatedOctober 2, 2025Material has been published

31,494 views

2,482 completions

2,027 likes

Daniel Hall Psychologist · Test reviewer

2,027 likes

Scale Explorer

How the Scales are Structured

RuminationR

Measures the tendency toward repetitive, negative thinking about past events that can prolong distress.

example score2/15

2/15Elevatedexample score

-11 – 0Low

1 – 15Elevated

A score of 2 falls in the Elevated range, suggesting some tendency to get stuck in repetitive negative thoughts about the past when stressed.

WorryW

Measures the tendency toward recurring negative future-focused thoughts that can increase distress and hinder emotional recovery.

example score6/15

6/15Elevatedexample score

-11 – 0Low

1 – 15Elevated

A score of 6 falls in the Elevated range, suggesting more frequent or intense anxious, future-oriented worrying as a coping pattern.

Blaming OthersBO

Measures the tendency to attribute personal difficulties primarily to other people’s actions or mistakes rather than one’s own role or situational factors.

example score4/15

4/15Elevated externalizationexample score

-11 – 0Low externalization

1 – 15Elevated externalization

A score of 4 falls in the Elevated externalization range, suggesting a noticeable tendency to shift responsibility for difficulties onto others, which may temporarily ease self-blame but can be linked with frustration or helplessness.

Self-BlameSB

Measures the tendency to attribute negative events to one’s own fault, which can undermine self-esteem and self-forgiveness.

example score6/15

6/15Moderateexample score

-11 – -1Low

0 – 7Moderate

8 – 15High

A score of 6 falls in the Moderate range, suggesting a noticeable but not extreme tendency toward self-blame when unpleasant events occur.

Cognitive DistortionsCD

Measures the tendency to interpret situations through inaccurate or negatively skewed thinking patterns that can intensify emotional distress.

example score0/15

0/15Typical rangeexample score

-11 – -1Low distortions

0Typical range

1 – 15Elevated distortions

A score of 0 falls in the typical range, suggesting cognitive distortions are not especially prominent in the person’s reported coping pattern.

Cognitive AvoidanceCA

Measures the tendency to suppress or mentally shift away from unpleasant thoughts to reduce discomfort.

example score3/15

3/15Moderateexample score

-11 – -1Low

0 – 7Moderate

8 – 15High

A score of 3 falls in the Moderate range, suggesting a noticeable but not dominant habit of mentally avoiding unpleasant thoughts.

Emotional AvoidanceEA

Measures the tendency to suppress, deny, or avoid experiencing intense emotions when under stress.

example score1/15

1/15Elevatedexample score

-11 – 0Low

1 – 15Elevated

A score of 1 falls in the Elevated range, suggesting a noticeable tendency to avoid or suppress emotions rather than engage with them directly.

Stress IntoleranceSI

Measures how strongly a person tends to react emotionally and physically to stress and how difficult it is for them to regain control during unpleasant events.

example score7/15

7/15Elevatedexample score

-11 – 0Low

1 – 15Elevated

A score of 7 falls in the Elevated range, suggesting stronger-than-usual stress reactivity that may make it harder to stay balanced and work through difficulties in the moment.

Emotional BehaviorEB

Measures the tendency toward intense, automatically triggered emotional reactions to stress, especially frequent negative emotional expression that can prolong distress.

example score-2/15

-2/15Lowexample score

-11 – -1Low

0 – 7Moderate

8 – 15High

A score of -2 falls in the Low range, suggesting relatively infrequent intense negative emotional reactions when under stress.

Safety BehaviorsSB

Assesses how often a person uses anxiety-reducing protective strategies such as avoidance, checking, or reassurance seeking when under stress.

example score1/15

1/15Elevated useexample score

-11 – 0Low use

1 – 15Elevated use

A score of 1 falls in the Elevated use range, suggesting protective behaviors are used somewhat more than minimal levels and may modestly contribute to discomfort with uncertainty.

Behavioral AvoidanceBA

Measures the tendency to avoid situations or actions that might trigger unpleasant emotions such as fear, shame, or guilt.

example score-4/15

-4/15Low avoidanceexample score

-11 – 0Low avoidance

1 – 15High avoidance

A score of -4 falls in the Low avoidance range, suggesting relatively infrequent reliance on avoiding stress-triggering situations or actions.

just completed the test

DATA-BASED USER COHORTS

Who Usually Takes This Test?

Therapy Clients in Distress

41%OF USERS

People in psychotherapy who feel overwhelmed by stress, anxiety, or low mood take it to pinpoint which coping patterns are keeping them stuck.

Clinician Intake Assessments

34%OF USERS

Psychologists, psychotherapists, and counselors use it with new or ongoing clients to quickly map maladaptive coping strategies and guide treatment focus.

Progress Monitoring in Therapy

25%OF USERS

Clients and clinicians repeat it during treatment to track changes in avoidance, worry, and other coping responses over time.

BASED ON AGGREGATED, ANONYMIZED DATA FROM TENS OF THOUSANDS OF FREUDLY USERS.

Benchmarking

See How You Compare

Once you complete the test, your results are compared with real-world data from people in your country.
Below is a preview of how scores are typically distributed across each scale.

Shaded area — where most people score

Dot — the average

You — your score lands on each curve after the test— your score, after the test

RuminationR

You?

Average4.3

Typical rangeTypical1 – 7.5

Possible-11 – 15

AnxietyA

You?

Average2.5

Typical rangeTypical-1.8 – 6.8

Possible-11 – 15

Shifting the blame onto othersStboo

You?

Average6.5

Typical rangeTypical3.2 – 9.8

Possible-11 – 15

Self-BlameS

You?

Average7.6

Typical rangeTypical3.5 – 11.8

Possible-11 – 15

Cognitive BiasesCB

You?

Average1.8

Typical rangeTypical-2.5 – 6.2

Possible-11 – 15

Cognitive AvoidanceCA

You?

Average8

Typical rangeTypical3.9 – 12.1

Possible-11 – 15

Emotional AvoidanceEA

You?

Average4.4

Typical rangeTypical-0.3 – 9.2

Possible-11 – 15

Inability to Handle StressItHS

You?

Average2.8

Typical rangeTypical-1.4 – 7.1

Possible-11 – 15

Emotional BehaviorEB

You?

Average-3.4

Typical rangeTypical-7.4 – 0.5

Possible-11 – 15

Protective BehaviorPB

You?

Average7.6

Typical rangeTypical3.7 – 11.6

Possible-11 – 15

Behavioral avoidanceBa

You?

Average6.2

Typical rangeTypical2.4 – 10.1

Possible-11 – 15

Featured On

SAMPLE QUESTIONS

Example Questions From the Test

Think about any difficult, unpleasant, or stressful events you have experienced during the past three months. Below are the most common stressful situations and the strategies people use to cope with difficulties and manage stress. Indicate how often you experience particular feelings and emotions, or how often you use a particular strategy. Select the response options that best fit your situation. Do not try to guess which answer is the most “correct” or how most people would respond. There are no “bad” or “good” answers—these are simply different ways people cope with difficulties. When answering the questions, be as honest as possible. Only you will see your test results, and it is important to understand which specific mechanisms may be interfering with your daily functioning. Therefore, there is no need to feel ashamed or embarrassed if you recognize yourself in certain patterns of behavior.

- Almost never
- Rarely
- Sometimes
- Often
- Very often
- Almost never
- Rarely
- Sometimes
- Often
- Very often
- Almost never
- Rarely
- Sometimes
- Often
- Very often

These are 3 of the 55 real questions — the rest appear in the test. No sign-up needed to start.

WHAT THE TEST MEASURES

Comprehensive Coping Inventory (CCI-55) Test - Description and methodology of the test

cbt

defense mechanisms

People who want a structured view of how they respond to pressure may find the Comprehensive Coping Inventory (CCI-55) Test useful for examining recurring mental, emotional, and behavioral patterns. This coping assessment is intended for people seeking language for difficult reactions and practical starting points for self-reflection. Results describe tendencies that may be worth noticing in daily situations.

What This Assessment Explores

The profile reports tendencies across thinking, responsibility, interpretation, avoidance, emotion, and protective action. The coping inventory test reports tendencies rather than a fixed type:

Rumination (-11-15; Low -11-0, Elevated 1-15) and Worry (-11-15; Low -11-0, Elevated 1-15) show repetitive negative thinking about past and future events.
Blaming Others (-11-15; Low externalization -11-0, Elevated externalization 1-15) and Self-Blame (-11-15; Low -11--1, Moderate 0-7, High 8-15) show where responsibility is placed.
Cognitive Distortions (-11-15; Low distortions -11--1, Typical range 0-0, Elevated distortions 1-15) and Cognitive Avoidance (-11-15; Low -11--1, Moderate 0-7, High 8-15) show biased interpretations and thought suppression.
Emotional Avoidance (-11-15; Low -11-0, Elevated 1-15), Stress Intolerance (-11-15; Low -11-0, Elevated 1-15), Emotional Behavior (-11-15; Low -11--1, Moderate 0-7, High 8-15), Safety Behaviors (-11-15; Low use -11-0, Elevated use 1-15), and Behavioral Avoidance (-11-15; Low avoidance -11-0, High avoidance 1-15) show feeling suppression, stress reactivity, emotion-driven action, reassurance/checking, and situational avoidance.

Methodology and Evidence Base

Items use a five-point frequency format: Almost never, Rarely, Sometimes, Often, and Very often. Representative content covers difficult tasks, withdrawal, reassurance, checking, rituals, intense emotions, stress sensations, suppression of feelings and thoughts, biased interpretations, self-criticism, blaming, future threat, and dwelling on past events. This structure asks about recurring responses rather than isolated incidents.

In this CCI-55 questionnaire, separate numerical outputs organize interpretation through displayed ranges and bands. The answer-to-point formula is not documented in the questionnaire, so scores should be read through those bands rather than reverse-engineered or treated as a universal severity scale.

For source tracing, Comprehensive Coping Inventory-55 (CCI-55; Pool, 2021) is the closest named source for this version. Its themes are conceptually consistent with Zurita Ona’s Comprehensive Coping Inventory work and with the appraisal-and-coping framework described by Folkman and Lazarus (1986), but this online form is not a direct adaptation of those studies or independently validated by them. McKay, Fanning, Pool, and Zurita Ona (2022) place related processes within process-based CBT. Results are self-reported and may be influenced by current mood, memory, self-awareness, and impression management; use them as a structured snapshot, not as population norms or diagnostic thresholds.

Author: Richard S. Lazarus, Susan Folkman

Literature:

Pool, Erica S. (2021). The CCI-55: An Updated Assessment Tool for Transdiagnostic Treatment. PhD dissertation, The Wright Institute, Berkeley, CA.
McKay, Matthew, Patrick Fanning, Erica Pool, and Patricia E. Zurita Ona. (2022). Healing Emotional Pain Workbook: Process-Based CBT Tools for Moving Beyond Sadness, Fear, Worry, and Shame to Discover Peace and Resilience. New Harbinger Publications.
Zurita Ona, Patricia E. (2007). Development and Validation of a Comprehensive Coping Inventory. PhD dissertation, The Wright Institute, Berkeley, CA.
Folkman, Susan, Richard S. Lazarus, Christine Dunkel-Schetter, Anita DeLongis, and Rand J. Gruen. (1986). Dynamics of a Stressful Encounter: Cognitive Appraisal, Coping, and Encounter Outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(5), 992-1003. 10.1037/0022-3514.50.5.992

Updated: 2025-10-02