Freudly+971 508685814hello@freudly.ai
Freudly
procrastination

Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire (MDMQ) Test

Take the online Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire (MDMQ) Test - AI psychologist FreudlyYou can take Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire (MDMQ) Testhere. Online version of a simple and accurate psychological test with interpretation.en
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
08:30
October 2, 2025
October 2, 2025
Material has been updated
October 2, 2025
Material has been published
19,580 views
1,419 completions
1,124 likes
Verified by Daniel Hall
Psychologist with 25 years of experience
Share
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
58: Low | 912: Moderate | 1315: 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
58: Low | 911: Moderate | 1215: 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
69: Low avoidance | 1014: Moderate avoidance | 1518: 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
610: Low alertness | 1114: Moderate alertness | 1518: 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.
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)
Hypervigilance (H)
Average
11.9
Normal range
10.213.7
min.
5
max.
15
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)
Procrastination (P)
Average
7.5
Normal range
5.69.4
min.
5
max.
15
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)
Avoidance (A)
Average
11.9
Normal range
10.313.5
min.
6
max.
18
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)
Alertness (A)
Average
13.7
Normal range
1215.5
min.
6
max.
18
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.
Featured On
SAMPLE QUESTIONS

Example Questions From the Test

People differ in how they make decisions. Please indicate how you typically make decisions. For each item, select the response option that best reflects your usual decision-making style.
    • Not true for me
    • Sometimes true
    • True for me
    • Not true for me
    • Sometimes true
    • True for me
    • Not true for me
    • Sometimes true
    • True for me
WHAT THE TEST MEASURES
About This Assessment
Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire, MDMQ Test

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.
Popular tests
Comments
Leave a Comment