Goal–Means–Result Test

People who want to understand whether their goals feel grounded, resources feel available, and outcomes are being judged realistically may find the Goal-Means-Result Test useful when planning or self-evaluation feels unclear. A structured profile can clarify a practical decision, while this four-scale goal profile shows where direction, available means, response frankness, and outcome appraisal align or diverge.

What This Assessment Explores

Questions sample activity, arousal, irritation, initiative, obedience, reflection, trust, aggression, decisions, success reactions. A goal-setting assessment compares direction with means.

The four dimensions are:

• Means: -9-9 assesses available means for goals; Limited means (-9--4), Moderate means (-3-3), and Strong means (4-9); low scores indicate lack of resources, low energy potential, conformity, dependence on others' opinions.
• Goal: -9-9 assesses stability and groundedness of set goals; Less stable goals (-9-0), Moderately stable goals (1-4), and Highly stable goals (5-9); low scores may reflect externally imposed goals and need for volitional effort.
• Sincerity Scale: 0-5 assesses response credibility and frankness; Low distortion (0-2), Moderate distortion (3-3), and High distortion (4-5); higher scores may indicate socially desirable responding.
• Result: -9-9 assesses ability to evaluate activity outcomes; Underestimates results (-9--4), Realistic assessment (-3-3), and Overestimates results (4-9); optimal scores indicate realistic self-appraisal and normal personal growth dynamics.

Methodology and Scientific Basis

The form uses brief self-report statements with Yes/No choices. Items cover habits, reactions, beliefs, and interpersonal tendencies, combining observable behavior with subjective experience. Responses are aggregated into the displayed dimensions; since individual answer weights are not shown, interpret the profile at scale level rather than item by item.

The relevant published instrument is Karmanov's Goal-Means-Result Questionnaire. This online questionnaire is conceptually consistent with that instrument, but identical wording, norms, and validation should not be assumed. Its displayed scoring therefore supports descriptive interpretation of each scale, not a claim that this version reproduces the source instrument.

Result bands are descriptive categories, not clinical thresholds. Read each scale at its own level and then consider the pattern across dimensions: ample resources can coexist with unstable aims, while outcome appraisal can differ from confidence or energy. As a goal and outcome assessment, the profile may shift with current mood, self-awareness, and socially desirable responding; use it to identify questions for reflection and compare impressions with behavior over time.