Home1
Psychological tests2
Coping Strategies Questionnaire3

Coping Strategies Questionnaire Test

For a concise look at your information-processing preferences, the Coping Strategies Questionnaire Test takes eight minutes and includes six questions. Its result shows whether logical, visual, auditory, or bodily cues are more prominent for you, supporting self-reflection about how you understand experiences and make choices.

Questions: 68 minutes

Coping Strategies Questionnaire Test: test ticket with numbers

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

33,973 views

2,875 completions

2,338 likes

Daniel Hall Psychologist · Test reviewer

2,338 likes

Scale Explorer

How the Scales are Structured

DiscreteD

Measures the extent to which a person relies on a discrete (digital) representational system—logical reasoning and structured information processing—over other perception channels.

example score12/24

12/24Moderateexample score

6 – 11Low

12 – 17Moderate

18 – 24High

A score of 12 falls in the Moderate range, suggesting a noticeable but not predominant tendency to process information through logic and structure.

VisualV

Measures the degree to which a person primarily processes and remembers information through visual images and attention to visual details.

example score18/24

18/24Moderateexample score

6 – 12Low

13 – 18Moderate

19 – 24High

A score of 18 falls in the Moderate range, suggesting a noticeable preference for visual cues (e.g., images, diagrams, and observing details) while other channels may also be used.

AuditoryA

Measures the extent to which a person primarily processes and prefers information through sounds, speech, and auditory imagery.

example score14/24

14/24Moderate auditory focusexample score

6 – 11Low auditory focus

12 – 18Moderate auditory focus

19 – 24High auditory focus

A score of 14 falls in the Moderate auditory focus range, suggesting a noticeable but not dominant tendency to rely on sounds, speech, and verbal cues when processing information.

KinestheticK

Measures how strongly a person relies on bodily sensations, movement, and physical experience when perceiving and processing information.

example score9/24

9/24Lowexample score

6 – 11Low

12 – 18Moderate

19 – 24High

A score of 9 falls in the Low range, suggesting bodily sensations and comfort cues are a less prominent channel for processing information compared with other modes.

just completed the test

DATA-BASED USER COHORTS

Who Usually Takes This Test?

Psychologists and counselors

41%OF USERS

They use it to quickly map a client’s dominant perception channel and adjust therapy, rapport, and explanations.

Teachers and tutors

34%OF USERS

They take it to understand how students absorb information best and tailor lessons, materials, and feedback.

Coaches and HR trainers

25%OF USERS

They use it for profiling and communication tuning to make coaching, training, and teamwork interactions more effective.

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

DiscreteD

You?

Average11.5

Typical rangeTypical9 – 13.9

Possible6 – 24

VisualV

You?

Average14.2

Typical rangeTypical11.9 – 16.5

Possible6 – 24

AuditoryA

You?

Average13.5

Typical rangeTypical10.7 – 16.3

Possible6 – 24

KinestheticK

You?

Average19.4

Typical rangeTypical17.2 – 21.6

Possible6 – 24

Featured On

SAMPLE QUESTIONS

Example Questions From the Test

The questionnaire contains six items, each with four response options. Rank all four statements within each item in order of preference based on their relevance and acceptability to you. Select the option that fits you best—the one you prefer most—and mark it with the number “4.” Then assign the number “3” to the best description among the remaining options. Next, mark the option that fits you less well with the number “2.” Finally, assign the number “1” to the option that is least appropriate for you. In this way, you will rank the statements by their relevance and acceptability to you.

- the feelings I am experiencing at the moment
- what sounds best
- what looks best to me
- a careful review of the problem and the facts
- the other person's tone of voice (pitch and loudness)
- whether or not I can clearly see the other person's point of view
- the logic of the other person's arguments
- whether I am in touch with the other person's genuine feelings
- how I dress and look
- the feelings I experience
- the words I choose
- my voice qualities (tone, timbre, volume)

These are 3 of the 6 real questions — the rest appear in the test. No sign-up needed to start.

WHAT THE TEST MEASURES

Coping Strategies Questionnaire Test - Description and methodology of the test

representational system

This coping strategies questionnaire offers a practical way to examine how a person takes in and organizes experience. The Coping Strategies Questionnaire Test is useful for people who want a clearer profile of their attention and reactions without reducing them to a single fixed type. Its results can support reflection on communication, decisions, and everyday responses.

What This Assessment Explores

Despite its title, this questionnaire focuses less on coping behaviour than on representational preferences. The title may suggest a coping strategies assessment, but the items describe whether logical, visual, auditory, or bodily cues are prominent; higher scores show relative preference, not ability or a fixed type. The displayed scales are:

Discrete (6-24) measures logical, structured processing and an artificially formed or transformed representational type that may follow upbringing, trauma, or occupational deformation; Low 6-11, Moderate 12-17, High 18-24.
Visual (6-24) measures mental imagery, visual representations, and attention to detail; Low 6-12, Moderate 13-18, High 19-24.
Auditory (6-24) measures sounds, speech, tone, and auditory imagery; Low auditory focus 6-11, Moderate auditory focus 12-18, High auditory focus 19-24.
Kinesthetic (6-24) measures bodily sensations, movement, comfort, gestures, and emotional reactions; Low 6-11, Moderate 12-18, High 19-24.

Methodology and Evidence Base

Although its title presents it as a coping strategy test, the response format is a four-choice self-report. Each item presents four alternatives, such as logic, appearance, sound, and feelings or bodily experience; the questionnaire specifies neither ranking nor point values. It reports scores for the displayed scales and their bands.

The catalogue registers this version under Richard S. Lazarus and Susan Folkman, while its four-channel structure corresponds to the KAVD questionnaire described by Ananyev (2007). This relationship is not established for the version, so it is an online questionnaire with a KAVD-related structure, not a verified adaptation of either instrument.

The questionnaire reports scores for the displayed scales and bands; these labels indicate relative prominence within the questionnaire rather than ability or a fixed style.

Self-report results can shift with mood, context, self-awareness, and interpretation. Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer, and Bjork found limited evidence that matching instruction to presumed learning styles improves learning, so the output should not prescribe a fixed way to learn. It is a reflective snapshot, not a diagnosis or measure of coping effectiveness.

Author: Richard S. Lazarus, Susan Folkman

Literature:

Ananyev, Viktor Alekseevich. (2007). Practicum in Health Psychology: A Methodological Guide to Primary Specific and Nonspecific Prevention. St. Petersburg: Rech. ISBN 5-9268-0527-9.
Bandler, Richard, and John Grinder. (1975). The Structure of Magic I: A Book About Language and Therapy. Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavior Books. ISBN 0-8314-0044-7.
Pashler, Harold, Mark McDaniel, Doug Rohrer, and Robert Bjork. (2008). Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105-119. 10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x

Updated: 2025-10-02