Self-Confidence Assessment 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
- Yes
- No
- Yes
- No
- Yes
- No
Self-Confidence Assessment Test - Description and methodology of the test
People wanting to understand where they rely on themselves can use this self-confidence questionnaire as a structured starting point. The Self-Confidence Assessment Test examines confidence in relationships, daily demands, thinking, and work, producing a profile of stronger and less secure areas for personal reflection without treating self-report as a clinical judgment.
What This Assessment Explores
Confidence is mapped by this self-trust assessment. These dimensions form the profile:
- Leisure (0-4) and With Parents (0-4) cover recreation/trust: Low self-trust 0-1/Moderate self-trust 2-3/High self-trust 4-4. Opposite Sex (0-5) covers attraction/communication: Low confidence 0-1/Moderate confidence 2-3/High confidence 4-5.
- With Children (0-6) cover parenting communication: Low self-trust 0-2/Moderate self-trust 3-4/High self-trust 5-6. In the Family (0-7) covers harmony: Low 0-2/Moderate 3-5/High 6-7. With Close People (0-8) covers trusted bonds: Low 0-2/Moderate 3-5/High 6-8.
- With Supervisors (0-6) and With Subordinates (0-6) cover authority/leadership: Low self-trust 0-2/Moderate self-trust 3-4/High self-trust 5-6. In Solving Everyday Problems (0-7) covers independence: Low 0-2/Moderate 3-5/High 6-7.
- Intellectual Domain (0-10) covers cognition: Lower self-trust 0-3/Moderate self-trust 4-7/Higher self-trust 8-10. In Professional Activity (0-10) covers competence: Low self-trust 0-3/Moderate self-trust 4-7/High self-trust 8-10. Overall Self-Confidence (0-73) summarizes domains: Low 0-24/Moderate 25-48/High 49-73.
Methodology and Scientific Basis
Each statement uses a Yes/No response about handling a situation, relying on personal abilities, or managing a relationship. Responses are summarized by domain and overall scores; the displayed ranges provide reporting bands, but this version does not state how individual answers are weighted.
The closest conceptual framework is Questionnaire for Assessing Self-Trust (Skripkina, 2000), which treats confidence in oneself as a cross-situational construct. This online questionnaire is conceptually consistent with that instrument, not presented as its adaptation. Skripkina and Khersonskiy (2024) likewise examine trust relationships as psychologically meaningful, but their study does not validate this version.
As a self-confidence test, interpret the profile comparatively: a high overall band can coexist with a lower domain, and a low domain may reflect context rather than global insecurity. No norm group, reliability coefficients, or clinical cutoffs are stated. Current stress, self-awareness, and response bias can also shift answers, so the result is a snapshot for reflection rather than a diagnosis.
- Skripkina, T. P. (2000). Psychology of Trust: A Textbook for Students of Higher Pedagogical Educational Institutions. Moscow: Akademiya. ISBN 5-7695-0647-4.
- Skripkina, T. P., & Khersonskiy, I. I. (2024). Emotional Burnout in Military Doctors with Different Models of Trust Relationships. Russian Psychological Journal, 21(2), 119-132. 10.21702/rpj.2024.2.7
Updated: