Freudly+971 508685814hello@freudly.ai
Freudly
intellect

Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale (CIHS) Test

Take the online Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale (CIHS) Test - AI psychologist FreudlyYou can take Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale (CIHS) Test here. Online version of a simple and accurate psychological test with interpretation.en
With 22 statements and a five-minute completion time, the Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale (CIHS) Test explores how you respond to disagreement, uncertainty, and new information. Your result highlights patterns in openness, confidence, and respect for other perspectives, offering a practical starting point for self-reflection and more constructive dialogue.
Questions: 225 minutes
Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale (CIHS): agreement scale card
October 2, 2025October 2, 2025Material has been updatedOctober 2, 2025Material has been published
24,813 views
2,319 completions
1,921 likes
Daniel HallPsychologist · Test reviewer
1,921 likes
Scale Explorer

How the Scales are Structured

Respect for Alternative ViewpointsRfAV
Measures how readily you recognize the value of viewpoints different from your own and consider them in discussion and decision-making.
example score14/30
14/30Low respectexample score
6 – 14Low respect
15 – 22Moderate respect
23 – 30High respect
A score of 14 suggests lower respect for alternative viewpoints, indicating you may be less inclined to weigh opposing perspectives when forming conclusions.
Independence of Intellect From EgoIoIFE
Measures how well you keep your self-worth separate from your knowledge and intellectual performance, allowing criticism to be processed objectively.
example score19/25
19/25Mostly objectiveexample score
5 – 12Ego-involved
13 – 19Mostly objective
20 – 25Highly ego-independent
A score of 19 suggests you usually separate ideas from self-esteem and can take feedback constructively, though criticism may still feel personal at times.
Lack of Intellectual OverconfidenceLoIO
Measures how much you avoid intellectual overconfidence by recognizing uncertainty and limits in your knowledge.
example score17/30
17/30Balanced confidenceexample score
6 – 13More overconfident
14 – 22Balanced confidence
23 – 30Less overconfident
A score of 17 falls in the Balanced confidence range, suggesting you generally acknowledge uncertainty and limits in your knowledge without excessive self-doubt.
Openness to Revising Personal BeliefsOtRPB
Measures how willing you are to revise your personal beliefs when new evidence suggests your current view may be wrong.
example score19/25
19/25High opennessexample score
5 – 12Low openness
13 – 18Moderate openness
19 – 25High openness
A score of 19 indicates high openness to updating your beliefs, suggesting you generally accept new evidence and adjust your views with relatively low defensiveness.
Intellectual HumilityIH
This scale measures openness to revising one’s beliefs, comfort with being wrong, and respect for alternative viewpoints.
example score33/110
33/110Lower humilityexample score
22 – 51Lower humility
52 – 80Moderate humility
81 – 110Higher humility
A score of 33 falls in the Lower humility range, suggesting a stronger tendency toward confidence in existing views and more difficulty adjusting them in response to criticism or new evidence.
just completed the test
DATA-BASED USER COHORTS

Who Usually Takes This Test?

Managers and team leads
41%OF USERS
They take it to spot whether they handle feedback without defensiveness and keep discussions productive when opinions clash.
Debaters and deep thinkers
34%OF USERS
They use it to check how willing they are to update beliefs, admit uncertainty, and take opposing arguments seriously.
People seeking self-growth
25%OF USERS
They take it to understand how strongly ego drives their reactions and to practice staying open-minded during criticism.
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
Respect for alternative points of viewRfapov
You?
Average12
Typical rangeTypical7.7 – 16.4
Possible6 – 30
Independence of Intelligence from the EgoIoIftE
You?
Average19.4
Typical rangeTypical16 – 22.8
Possible5 – 25
Lack of intellectual self-confidenceLois
You?
Average22.7
Typical rangeTypical18.2 – 27.2
Possible6 – 30
Openness to Revising Personal BeliefsOtRPB
You?
Average14.3
Typical rangeTypical11.5 – 17.2
Possible5 – 25
Intellectual Humility ScaleIHS
You?
Average87.4
Typical rangeTypical73.8 – 101
Possible22 – 110
Featured On
SAMPLE QUESTIONS

Example Questions From the Test

    • Strongly disagree
    • Somewhat disagree
    • Neither agree nor disagree
    • Somewhat agree
    • Strongly agree
    • Strongly disagree
    • Somewhat disagree
    • Neither agree nor disagree
    • Somewhat agree
    • Strongly agree
    • Strongly disagree
    • Disagree somewhat
    • Neither agree nor disagree
    • Agree somewhat
    • Strongly agree
WHAT THE TEST MEASURES

Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale (CIHS) Test - Description and methodology of the test

intellect

For readers interested in thinking habits, this intellectual humility questionnaire offers a focused way to examine how personal beliefs meet disagreement, uncertainty, and correction. The Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale (CIHS) Test gives a structured picture of receptiveness, confidence, and the connection between beliefs and self-worth. It suits anyone who wants to reflect on dialogue, judgment, and the possibility of changing their mind.

What This Assessment Explores

The questionnaire examines reactions when an important opinion is challenged. It covers respect for disagreement, confidence, belief revision, and whether contradiction feels threatening to identity or worth. In this CIHS self-assessment, the result describes tendencies rather than permanent qualities.

Five displayed dimensions are:

  • Respect for Alternative Viewpoints (6-30) measures regard for differing opinions: Low respect (6-14), Moderate respect (15-22), High respect (23-30).
  • Independence of Intellect From Ego (5-25) measures separation of knowledge from self-worth: Ego-involved (5-12), Mostly objective (13-19), Highly ego-independent (20-25).
  • Lack of Intellectual Overconfidence (6-30) measures doubt about being unquestionably right: More overconfident (6-13), Balanced confidence (14-22), Less overconfident (23-30).
  • Openness to Revising Personal Beliefs (5-25) measures readiness to update views: Low openness (5-12), Moderate openness (13-18), High openness (19-25).
  • Intellectual Humility (22-110) measures fallibility, openness, revision, and respect: Lower humility (22-51), Moderate humility (52-80), Higher humility (81-110).

Methodology and Scientific Basis

Each item uses a five-point agreement response, from Strongly disagree to Strongly agree. The statements address listening, certainty, changing one’s mind, and feeling attacked or diminished when important beliefs are challenged. This format captures habitual reactions rather than factual knowledge.

The CIHS online test reports results as dimension totals and an overall total with the displayed bands; the questionnaire does not specify how individual answers are weighted.

The questionnaire is conceptually consistent with the published Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale; a Polish version studied by Kroplewski and colleagues provides related evidence, while Tangney’s theoretical work offers context for humility. These sources link fallibility, openness, revision, and respect for alternative perspectives, but this online questionnaire is not presented as a direct adaptation.

The displayed bands are descriptive labels, not standardized population norms or diagnostic cutoffs. Results may reflect current circumstances, social desirability, and imperfect self-awareness, so they are descriptive patterns rather than definitive judgments.

Author: June Tangney, Mark Leary
Literature:
  • Krumrei-Mancuso, Elizabeth J., and Steven V. Rouse. “The Development and Validation of the Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale.” Journal of Personality Assessment, 98(2), 209-221, 2016. 10.1080/00223891.2015.1068174
  • Kroplewski, Zdzislaw, Elizabeth J. Krumrei-Mancuso, Grazyna Bielecka, and Malgorzata Szczesniak. “A Preliminary Validation of the Polish Version of the Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale (CIHS).” Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 15, 3627-3638, 2022. 10.2147/PRBM.S380470
  • Tangney, June P. “Humility: Theoretical Perspectives, Empirical Findings and Directions for Future Research.” Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 19(1), 70-82, 2000. 10.1521/jscp.2000.19.1.70

Updated:

Popular tests
Comments
Leave a Comment