EPQ-R
Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised (EPQ-R)
The EPQ-R is a self-administered personality questionnaire based on Eysenck's PEN model. The full adult form explores four distinct dimensions: extraversion, neuroticism, psychoticism, and social desirability. Widely used in clinical, health, occupational, and forensic psychology, as well as in research, it helps describe relatively stable traits rather than a passing emotional state. Its practical value lies in reading the three personality dimensions together with the L scale, which makes it possible to assess the candor of the responses and to nuance the interpretation of the profile.
- Number of questions
- 100 questions
- Estimated duration
- 20 minutes
- Language
- English
- Original name
- Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised
- Target audience
- Adolescents and adults
- Authors
- Hans J. Eysenck, Sybil B. G. Eysenck (1985)
- Category
- General
Scoring & interpretation
Each answer that matches the scoring key is worth 1 point, and the others 0. Four distinct raw scores are obtained: Psychoticism from 0 to 32, Extraversion from 0 to 23, Neuroticism from 0 to 24, and Lie or social conformity from 0 to 21. Some items are keyed Yes and others No. Raw scores are then compared with the manual's norms, most often as T-scores. A high Extraversion score suggests sociability, activity, and stimulation seeking. A high Neuroticism score suggests greater emotional reactivity. A high Psychoticism score reflects a tougher, colder, more impulsive, or nonconformist style. A high L scale score suggests a favorable self-presentation and calls for caution when interpreting the profile.
Usage
This tool isn't available on Mentaal. To use this questionnaire in your practice, you need a valid license. We invite you to send it directly from the publisher's website.
Available alternatives
What psychologists think
No ratings yet. Be the first to rate this questionnaire.
Clarity and comprehension
—Are the test's instructions and questions easy for patients to understand?
Clinical relevance
—Does the test measure what it's meant to measure, and is it useful in a clinical setting?
Perceived reliability of the results
—Do the results seem reliable and consistent in their interpretation?