Home
Psychological tests
Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire (MDMQ)

Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire (MDMQ) Test

Understand how you make choices under uncertainty and manage stress in just 3 minutes. With 22 quick items, it pinpoints avoidance, delay, and rational strengths to guide coaching or care.

Start Online Test

Questions: 223 minutes

Hi! My name is Freudly, i am an AI therapist, I will give you an interpretation of the test after you complete it.

08:30

October 2, 2025

October 2, 2025
Material has been updated

October 2, 2025
Material has been published

16,931 view

1,092 completions

924 likes

Verified by Daniel Hall

Psychologist with 25 years of experience

Scale Explorer

How the Scales are Structured

example score

11/15

Hypervigilance (H)

Measures the tendency to react to difficult choices with hurried, impulsive searching for an exit rather than careful analysis.

Low

Moderate

High

5 – 8: Low | 9 – 12: Moderate | 13 – 15: High

A score of 11 falls in the Moderate range, suggesting you may sometimes rush decisions under pressure, though not consistently at a panic-driven level.

example score

10/15

Procrastination (P)

This scale measures how strongly a person tends to delay making decisions and put off taking responsibility for choices.

Low

Moderate

High

5 – 8: Low | 9 – 11: Moderate | 12 – 15: High

A score of 10 falls in the Moderate range, suggesting a noticeable tendency to postpone decisions at times, especially when choices feel demanding or unclear.

example score

13/18

Avoidance (A)

Measures the tendency to evade making decisions by shifting responsibility, delaying choice, or justifying dubious alternatives under uncertainty.

Low avoidance

Moderate avoidance

High avoidance

6 – 9: Low avoidance | 10 – 14: Moderate avoidance | 15 – 18: High avoidance

A score of 13 falls in the Moderate avoidance range, suggesting you may sometimes sidestep decisions or defer responsibility when situations feel uncertain or stressful.

example score

8/18

Vigilance (V)

Alertness (vigilance) measures how deliberately and analytically a person clarifies goals, weighs alternatives, and thinks through information before deciding.

Low alertness

Moderate alertness

High alertness

6 – 10: Low alertness | 11 – 14: Moderate alertness | 15 – 18: High alertness

A score of 8 falls in the Low alertness range, suggesting a less thorough, less deliberative approach to evaluating options before making decisions.

Start Online Test

just completed the test

DATA-BASED USER COHORTS

Who Usually Takes This Test?

Anxious overthinkers

41%OF USERS

People who get stuck weighing options and want to understand why they delay decisions and how to cope better under uncertainty.

Managers under pressure

34%OF USERS

Leaders making frequent high-stakes calls who want to spot stress-driven decision patterns and strengthen a more rational, constructive approach.

Coaching and therapy clients

25%OF USERS

Clients working on self-regulation who want clear feedback on avoidance, procrastination, and coping strategies in ambiguous situations.

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

RESULTS YOU CAN ACTUALLY USE

Scale Results
— Explained Clearly

Your scores across each test scale are translated into plain, usable insights. You won’t just get numbers — you’ll learn how your results impact your daily life, emotional state, and overall well-being.

AI-Powered
Interpretation

You’ll receive a structured, clinically-grounded explanation. Our AI analyzes patterns and relationships between scales to provide a coherent interpretation, without exaggerated language.

Statistical
Comparison

See how your results compare to others. Anonymized platform data is used to create a percentile scale, which identifies whether your results are typical.

Practical
Recommendations

You’ll receive clear, actionable guidance tailored to your profile. These easy-to-implement suggestions focus on coping, self-regulation, and realistic next steps.

AI-Powered
Insights

Get insights on behavioral and thought patterns you might not notice on your own. By uncovering subtle connections between your responses, you’ll better understand what may be driving your current results.

Discuss with
an AI Therapist

Clarify, reflect, and explore your results right away. Talk through your experience, ask questions, and explore meanings in a calm, non-diagnostic dialogue.

Start Online Test

Used in 52+ countries

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.

Hypervigilance (H)

Average

11.9

Normal range

10.2 — 13.7

min.

max.

Majority

This curve shows how scores are typically distributed.
Once you complete the test, your result will appear on the scale so you can see how you compare.

Procrastination (P)

Average

7.5

Normal range

5.6 — 9.4

min.

max.

Majority

This curve shows how scores are typically distributed.
Once you complete the test, your result will appear on the scale so you can see how you compare.

Avoidance (A)

Average

11.9

Normal range

10.3 — 13.5

min.

max.

Majority

This curve shows how scores are typically distributed.
Once you complete the test, your result will appear on the scale so you can see how you compare.

Alertness (A)

Average

13.7

Normal range

12 — 15.5

min.

max.

Majority

This curve shows how scores are typically distributed.
Once you complete the test, your result will appear on the scale so you can see how you compare.

Start Online Test

Featured On

CLEAR ANSWERS TO COMMON QUESTIONS

Frequently Asked Questions

What does this questionnaire measure?

It measures decision-making patterns when choices involve uncertainty. It also assesses common coping responses used under pressure.

How long does it take and how many items are included?

It usually takes about 3 minutes to complete. It includes 22 items.

How should items be answered?

Select the response that best reflects typical behavior rather than an ideal response. Answer all items without spending too much time on any one item.

What kinds of decision-making tendencies are covered?

Items cover tendencies such as delaying decisions, avoiding choices, and using a rational and constructive approach. The pattern of responses indicates which tendencies are more pronounced.

How are results used and what are the limits of interpretation?

Results are used to identify strengths and potential bottlenecks in decision-making and stress coping. They do not provide a diagnosis and should be interpreted alongside other information.

WHAT THE TEST MEASURES

About This Assessment

Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire (MDMQ) Test - Symptoms and Signs

procrastination coping behavior

This questionnaire is designed to assess individual differences in decision-making tendencies under conditions of uncertainty and perceived pressure. The Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire (MDMQ) provides a brief self-report measure of how a person typically approaches difficult choices and the stress associated with them.

The instrument includes 22 items and typically requires about 3 minutes to complete. Items are intended to characterize common patterns such as decisional delay, avoidance, and more deliberate or vigilant decision-making. The measure is commonly used in clinical, counseling, and applied assessment contexts as an index of decision-related coping style.

Originally developed by Leon Mann and Irving L. Janis, the Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire (MDMQ) can help identify decision-making patterns that may contribute to distress or impaired functioning, particularly when decisions are time-pressured or ambiguous. Results are generally interpreted as descriptive indicators of decision style and are best considered alongside clinical interview data and other relevant measures.

Author: Irving L. Janis, Leon Mann

Literature: Janis, I. L., & Mann, L. Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment. Free Press. 1977.; Mann, L., Burnett, P., Radford, M., & Ford, S. The Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire: An instrument for measuring patterns for coping with decisional conflict. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. 1997.

Test Question Form