Existential Motivations 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.
Example Questions From the Test
- Applies
- Mostly applies
- Partly applies
- Partly does not apply
- Rather does not apply
- Does not apply
- Applies
- Mostly applies
- Applies partly
- Partly does not apply
- Rather does not apply
- Does not apply
- Applies
- Mostly applies
- Partly applies
- Partly does not apply
- Rather does not apply
- Does not apply
Existential Motivations Test - Description and methodology of the test
For readers reflecting on how they find direction, relate to themselves, and meet life’s demands, the Existential Motivations Test offers a structured profile of existential orientation. This existential motivations assessment is suited to personal reflection when you want more than a single mood label. The result brings together inner resources, tensions, and possible areas for deeper consideration.
What the Questionnaire Measures
These questions examine meaning, self-worth, values, trust, freedom, responsibility, belonging, insecurity, and engagement with life. Viewed as an existential fulfillment test, the questionnaire groups related responses into five displayed results:
- Meaning in Life (14-84) measures finding and realizing meaning: Low meaning clarity (14-37), Moderate meaning focus (38-60), Strong meaning realization (61-84).
- Self-Worth (14-84) measures being oneself and maintaining inner stability: Low (14-37), Moderate (38-60), High (61-84).
- Fundamental Value (14-84) measures living by values and emotional engagement: Low (14-37), Moderate (38-60), High (61-84).
- Fundamental Trust (14-84) measures accepting life’s conditions and anxiety: Low trust (14-37), Moderate trust (38-60), High trust (61-84).
- Overall Score (56-336) reflects existential fulfillment, freedom, and responsibility: Lower fulfillment (56-149), Moderate fulfillment (150-242), Higher fulfillment (243-336).
Together, the profile indicates areas of grounding and areas where uncertainty or difficulty choosing a direction may be stronger.
Methodology and Scientific Basis
Each statement uses a six-step agreement format, moving from “applies” or “true of me” through partial agreement to “does not apply” or “not true of me.” Respondents judge how closely the statements match their experience.
The approach is conceptually consistent with the Test of Existential Motivations (TEM), associated with Petra Eckhardt’s work on existential motivation, self-worth, and meaning. Julia M. Koryakina’s 2015 analysis discusses fulfilled life and existential motivations, while Alfried Langle’s 1999 framework describes the four motivational domains. This online questionnaire is not a verbatim research instrument.
Responses are combined into dimension totals and an overall total. The displayed bands organize those totals into descriptive levels; the answer choices do not reveal how many points each response contributes. Higher results generally suggest greater access to the relevant resource, while lower results suggest more difficulty.
Scores remain sensitive to self-awareness, response style, and current circumstances. The bands do not establish population norms, clinical cutoffs, or equivalence with a published research version. As an existential motivation questionnaire, the profile is best read with the respondent’s personal context in mind.
- Eckhardt, Petra. (2000). Scales for Assessing Existential Motivation, Self-Worth, and Experience of Meaning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Vienna.
- Eckhardt, Petra. (2001). Scales for Assessing Existential Motivation, Self-Worth, and Experience of Meaning. Existenzanalyse, 18(1), 35-39.
- Koryakina, Julia M. (2015). Conditions for Fulfilled Life: Description and Measurement of Existential Motivations. National Psychological Journal, 4(20), 49-65. 10.11621/npj.2015.0405
- Langle, Alfried. (1999). What Moves the Person? The Existential Motivation of the Person. Existenzanalyse, 16(3), 18-29.
Updated: