Rokeach Value Survey (RVS) Test

People examining why certain goals, relationships, and habits matter more than others may use this profile to clarify their priorities. The Rokeach Value Survey (RVS) Test suits readers who want a structured way to examine preferred life outcomes and everyday conduct. It is a personal values assessment that can support reflection on choices, tensions, and direction.

What This Assessment Explores

At the conceptual level, the Rokeach values questionnaire separates terminal values from instrumental values. Terminal values are desired outcomes; instrumental values are preferred conduct.

Editorially:

• Terminal values include An Active, Eventful Life (A Full and Emotionally Rich Life), Wisdom, Health (Physical and Mental), and Love (Spiritual And Physical Intimacy With A Loved One).
• Instrumental values include Cleanliness and Orderliness, Responsibility, Tolerance, and Helpfulness (Caring).

Each scale runs 1-18. An Active, Eventful Life (A Full and Emotionally Rich Life) displays Lower priority 1-6, Moderate priority 7-12, High priority 13-18; Wisdom displays High priority 1-6, Moderate priority 7-12, Lower priority 13-18; Intransigence Toward Faults in Self and Others displays More accepting 1-6, Balanced 7-12, More demanding 13-18. Other scales use High priority, Low priority, Higher priority, or Lower priority across 1-6, 7-12, and 13-18 bands, so direction is scale-specific.

Methodology and Scientific Basis

Each item presents a value statement with a visible 1-10 response scale. Choosing a position communicates relative importance; the online profile then reports each dimension on its own 1-18 scale. Because the exact conversion rule is undocumented, scores should be read as displayed rather than reverse-engineered into assumed point weights.

This questionnaire is an online version conceptually consistent with the Rokeach Value Survey (RVS), not a claim that the published instrument validated this digital administration. Rokeach’s theory distinguishes desired ends from preferred means of conduct. Feather’s 1973 study is evidence that value results can vary with assessment procedure, so this format should not be treated as identical to every paper administration.

In practical terms, this value priorities test has no stated population norms, reliability estimates, or clinical cutoffs. Responses may shift with current circumstances, culture, social desirability, and self-awareness. Use the pattern to compare priorities and reflect on choices; it captures reported preferences at one point rather than a complete account of personality or behaviour.