Pathological Liar 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
- Strongly disagree
- Disagree
- Not sure
- Agree
- Strongly disagree
- Disagree
- Not sure
- Agree
- Strongly disagree
- Disagree
- Not sure
- Agree
Pathological Liar Test - Description and methodology of the test
For people who suspect that dishonesty has become repetitive, difficult to interrupt, or costly to relationships, this pathological liar test offers a focused way to examine the pattern. It is intended for someone who notices recurring lies and wants to separate frequency from the feeling of being pulled toward them. This compulsive liar test may help organize those experiences into areas for reflection rather than a single global judgment.
What This Assessment Explores
The questionnaire examines how often lying occurs, how controllable it feels, and what emotional or interpersonal costs accompany it. Items address reflexive or stress-linked dishonesty, failed efforts to stop, anxiety, shame, conflict, damaged trust, and relationship strain. The result shows which pattern is most prominent.
The displayed dimensions are:
- Compulsion & Control (0-30) measures automaticity and resistance: Low compulsion 0-10, Moderate compulsion 11-20, High compulsion 21-30.
- Impact & Consequences (0-30) measures emotional and relational cost: Low impact 0-10, Moderate impact 11-20, High impact 21-30.
- Lying Frequency (0-40) measures reported everyday frequency: Low frequency 0-13, Moderate frequency 14-27, High frequency 28-40.
Together, they separate frequency, perceived loss of control, and harm. As a pathological lying questionnaire, it emphasizes patterns rather than isolated incidents.
Methodology and Scientific Basis
Responses use agreement choices from strongly disagree to agree, frequency choices from never to often, and recent-occurrence choices from not at all to many times. The combination covers both general tendencies and situations.
Scores are reported separately for the three dimensions. Each response contributes to its relevant area, while the displayed bands organize the result; the questionnaire does not establish a diagnostic total. Scores describe reported experiences, not verified behavior.
The content is conceptually consistent with the Pathological Lying Inventory (Hart et al., 2024), a published measure of pathological lying, distress, and social dysfunction. This online questionnaire is not a direct administration or adaptation of that instrument. Curtis and Hart (2020) offer a framework in which pathological lying is persistent, pervasive, often compulsive behavior linked with distress or impaired functioning. As a pathological lying assessment, this questionnaire applies that focus to self-reported urges, frequency, and consequences.
No standardised norms or diagnostic cut-offs are established here. Memory, self-awareness, current stress, and impression management can affect self-report, so interpretation should consider the pattern across dimensions and situations behind the answers.
- Hart, C. L., Curtis, D. A., & Terrizzi, J. A. (2024). Development and validation of the pathological lying inventory. Current Psychology, 43, 21218-21228. 10.1007/s12144-024-05900-1
- Curtis, D. A., & Hart, C. L. (2020). Pathological lying: Theoretical and empirical support for a diagnostic entity. Psychiatric Research and Clinical Practice, 2(2), 62-69. 10.1176/appi.prcp.20190046
Updated: