Purpose in Life Test

Abstract

The Purpose in Life Test (PIL) is a widely used, self-administered measure designed to quantify the extent to which an individual perceives meaning and purpose in their life. The instrument is divided into three distinct sections. Part A, which is the segment most frequently utilized in research, consists of 20 items. Respondents use unique 7-point Likert-type scales for each item to rate their subjective experience, with anchors varying for every question (e.g., 1 being “completely bored” and 7 being “exuberant, enthusiastic”). The numerical responses from Part A are summed to derive the overall score, which is the primary indicator of the presence of meaning. Parts B and C are qualitative sections, generally ignored for standard psychometric research but used clinically. Part B requires the completion of 13 incomplete sentences, while Part C asks the individual to write about their life goals, hopes, and motivations.

Keywords

Purpose in Life Test, PIL, Logotherapy, Meaning in Life, Existential Vacuum, Existentialism, Crumbaugh, Maholick, Psychometric Scale, Depression

Authors

James C. Crumbaugh, Leonard T. Maholick

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Purpose in Life Test (PIL) is to assess the degree to which an individual has successfully established a sense of meaning in their existence. Developed based on the principles of Logotherapy, pioneered by Viktor Frankl, the scale fundamentally measures the inverse of existential frustration or the “will to meaning” (Frankl, 1955, 1960). Higher scores on the PIL are interpreted as indicating a lower presence of the existential vacuum—a state of profound emptiness often characterized by boredom and apathy (Crumbaugh & Henrion, 1988).

It is crucial to note that the PIL is specifically designed to quantify the extent to which meaning has already been found by the individual, rather than measuring the motivation or desire to seek such purpose. The scale provides a quantifiable metric for a concept Frankl viewed as a fundamental human motivation, whose absence is often observed in clinical populations.

Construct

The PIL measures the presence of meaning in life, which is theoretically defined as the opposite of the existential vacuum. This construct is rooted in Viktor Frankl’s Logotherapy, which posits that the primary motivational force in humans is the search for meaning. Frankl suggested that possessing a substantial degree of meaning is a typical condition for psychologically healthy and normally functioning individuals.

Empirical evidence has linked high PIL scores to certain values, such as salvation on the Rokeach Value Survey (Crandall & Rasmussen, 1975). Furthermore, the PIL correlates significantly with an intrinsic orientation to religion, suggesting a theoretical and empirical connection between spiritual fulfillment and the experience of purpose, although the precise use of the term “spiritual” remains conceptually ambiguous in the original framework.

Validity

Overall, the PIL demonstrates reasonable validity, particularly in its ability to differentiate between clinical and non-clinical groups. The instrument successfully predicts membership in patient versus non-patient populations (Crumbaugh, 1968; Crumbaugh & Maholick, 1964) and distinguishes inmates from non-inmates (Reker, 1977). Furthermore, PIL scores show moderate correlations with ratings of meaning provided by external observers, such as therapists (r = .38) and clergy (r = .47), supporting its construct validity in relation to logotherapeutic variables.

However, concerns regarding its discriminant validity exist. The PIL shows low association with scores on the MMPI, indicating it measures a unique construct, yet it is highly correlated with depression (r = .39 in the original study, rising to r = .65 in later samples of psychiatric patients). This strong and consistent association has led some researchers (e.g., Dyck, 1987) to suggest that the PIL may function primarily as an indirect measure of depressive status, which may account for its efficacy in distinguishing clinical populations. Additionally, as a self-administered scale, the PIL is susceptible to social desirability bias, particularly in competitive or evaluative settings. Finally, because the PIL was developed primarily using white American samples and is based on a Western philosophical perspective, its cross-cultural validity remains a significant concern when applied to diverse populations.

Reliability

The PIL has demonstrated solid internal consistency and acceptable test-retest stability across various samples. The original split-half reliability, calculated using the odd-even method and corrected via the Spearman-Brown prophecy formula, was reported at .90 (Crumbaugh & Maholick, 1964). Subsequent studies confirmed high internal consistency, including a split-half reliability of .92 found in a sample of inmates (Reker, 1977).

Test-retest correlations, which measure stability over time, have varied depending on the interval: .83 over one week (Meier & Edwards, 1974), .79 over six weeks (Reker & Cousins, 1979), and .68 over 12 weeks (Reker, 1977). These figures suggest that the PIL is a stable measure of the purpose construct.

Factor Analysis

When subjected to factor analysis, the PIL consistently reveals that it is composed of multiple discernible components rather than representing a single, unified construct (Dyck, 1987; Reker & Cousins, 1979). This lack of conceptual coherence suggests that the overall score of the PIL may not be exclusively measuring “purpose in life.” Researchers must remain mindful that other components, such as underlying levels of depression, may be influencing the association of the PIL score with other psychological variables.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-administered psychological questionnaire based on Logotherapy principles.

Format: Three-part instrument (Part A, B, and C). Part A (20 items) uses unique 7-point scales for objective scoring. Parts B (13 incomplete sentences) and C (essay response) are qualitative.

Language Available: Primarily English; translations and modifications for other languages are under development due to cross-cultural validity concerns.

Population Group: Clinical and non-clinical populations (originally developed for American respondents).

Age Group: Adolescents (13-19) and adults (25 and older).

Population Details: Normative data were established using diverse groups, including Harvard undergraduates, psychiatric outpatients, hospitalized alcoholic patients, religious trainees, and business professionals. A fifth-grade reading level is required for administration.

Test Methodology: Part A items are scored 1 to 7 and summed. Normative means are 112.4 for normals and 92.6 for patients. A cutting score of 102 distinguishes between clinical and normal populations. Scores >= 113 indicate a definite presence of purpose; scores <= 91 indicate a lack of clear meaning. Testing typically takes less than 15 minutes.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The PIL was originally described in Crumbaugh and Maholick (1964). The scale and manual are published by Psychometric Affiliates (P.O. Box 807, Murfreesboro, TN 37133) and can also be ordered through the Institute of Logotherapy in Berkeley, California.

Test Year: 1964

Reference’s

• Allport, G. W., & Ross, J.M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 432-443.
• Chamberlain, K., & Zika, S. (1988). Measuring meaning in life: An examination of three scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 9, 589-596.
• Crandall, J.E., & Rasmussen, R. D. (1975). Purpose in life as related to specific values. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 31, 483-485.
• Crumbaugh, J. C. (1968). Cross-validation of Purpose-in-Life test based on Frankl’s concepts. Journal of Individual Psychology, 24, 74-81.
• Crumbaugh, J.C. (1977). The seeking of noetic goals test (SONG): A complementary scale to the Purpose in Life Test (PIL). Journal of Clinical Psychology, 33, 900-901.
• Crumbaugh, J. C., & Henrion, R. (1988). The PIL Test: Administration, interpretation, uses theory and critique. The International Forum for Logotherapy, 11, 76-88.
• Crumbaugh, J.C., & Maholick, L. T. (1964). An experimental study in existentialism: The psychometric approach to Frankl’s concept of noogenic neurosis. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 20, 200-207.
• Crumbaugh, J.C., Raphael, S. M., & Shrader, R. R. (1970). Frankl’s will to meaning in a religious order. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 26, 206-201.
• Dyck, M. J. (1987). Assessing logotherapeutic constructs: Conceptual and psychometric status of the purpose in life and seeking of noetic goals tests. Clinical Psychology Review, 7, 439-447.
• Florian, V. (1989-1990). Meaning and purpose in life of bereaved parents whose son fell during active military service. Omega, 20, 91-102.
• Frankl, V. E. (1955). The doctor and the soul. NY: Alfred A. Knopf.
• Frankl, V. E. (1958). The will to meaning. Journal of Pastoral Care, 12, 82-88.
• Frankl, V. E. (1960). Beyond self-actualization and self-expression. Journal of Existential Psychiatry, 1, 5-20.
• Harlow, L. L., Newcomb, M. D., & Bentler, P. M. (1987). Purpose in Life Test assessment using latent variable methods. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 26, 235-236.
• Meier, A., & Edwards, H. (1974). Purpose-in-Life Test: Age and sex differences. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 30, 384-386.
• Nackord, E. J., Jr., & Fabry, J. (1983). A college test of logotherapeutic concepts. The International Forum for Logotherapy, 6, 117-122.
• Reker, G. T. (1977). The Purpose-in-Life Test in an inmate population: An empirical investigation. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 33, 688-693.
• Reker, G. T., & Cousins, J. B. (1979). Factor structure, construct validity and reliability of the Seeking of Noetic Goals (SONG) and Purpose in Life (PIL) Tests. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 35, 85-91.
• Rokeach, M. (1967). Value survey. Sunnyvale, CA: Halgren Tests.
• Shek, D. T. L. (1994). Meaning in life and adjustment amongst midlife parents in Hong Kong. The International Forum for Logotherapy, 17, 102-107.
• Waisberg, J. L. (1994). Purpose in life and outcome of treatment for alcohol dependence. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 33, 49-63.

Items of the PURPOSE IN LIFE TEST

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

The original text did not include the specific items of the Purpose in Life Test (PIL).