This test is built on the real method of Karl Koch, the Baumtest (tree test), published in German in 1949. Koch built on the work of Swiss vocational counselor Emil Jucker, who in the 1920s already used tree drawings in career guidance work, and systematized the idea by applying handwriting-analysis principles to the parts of the tree: trunk, canopy, branches, roots.
The original instruction: "Draw a fruit tree." Koch considered the tree an especially stable symbol of body image and inner life, with the advantage that, not being a person, it would allow projecting content with less conscious censorship than a direct self-portrait.
How the report works
It uses 9 indicators: 4 are measured directly from your canvas (size, placement, thickness, shading) and 5 depend on you telling us what you drew (roots, canopy, branches, fruit, trunk shape). The tree test has something particular going for it: recent clinical studies (2015 and 2025) found that objective, quantified measures, like the size of the tree relative to the page, do distinguish, with real data, patients with cognitive decline or suicide ideation risk. That's not the same as saying the tree reveals general personality traits, and this report explains that difference clearly.
A canvas drawn with a mouse will never capture the nuance of a pencil stroke, but it does capture magnitudes (size, position, thickness), which is exactly what we measure. We don't claim diagnostic precision, and neither does the original test.
Sources
- Koch, K. (1949). Der Baumtest: Der Baumzeichenversuch als psychodiagnostisches Hilfsmittel. Verlag Hans Huber.
- Stanzani Maserati, M., Matacena, C., Sambati, L., Oppi, F., Poda, R., De Matteis, M., & Gallassi, R. (2015). The Tree-Drawing Test (Koch's Baum Test): A useful aid to diagnose cognitive impairment. Behavioural Neurology, 2015, 534681.
- Zhang, Y., Liu, Y., Liu, W., Sun, L., Leng, F., Li, Z., & Liu, G. (2025). Validity of the Tree Drawing Test Suicide Ideation Assessment Scale in adolescents. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 16, 1701452.
- Kahill, S. (1984). Human figure drawing in adults: An update of the empirical evidence, 1967-1982. Canadian Psychology, 25, 269-292.
All possible results
Your tree drawing report
Nine real indicators from Koch's method, each connected to what you drew: what he claimed about that specific value, and what the scientific evidence says today, including recent studies on questions very different from what Koch had in mind.
See the detail
Karl Koch published the Baumtest in 1949. The symbolic interpretation of each part of the tree has barely any supporting studies; the only part with something real behind it is objective measurements of the drawing itself, applied to very specific clinical questions (cognitive decline, suicide risk), not to general personality. This report exists to show that difference clearly, not to diagnose you with anything.
Indicative result, not a diagnosis. Drawing tests have no recognised diagnostic validity: research does not support most of their interpretations. This describes what you drew today, not your personality or your psychological state.
How this test was built
A report with 9 indicators : 4 are measured directly on your drawing (size, placement, line thickness, shading) and 5 depend on your answer about what you drew (roots, canopy, branches, fruit, trunk shape).
This is not a psychological diagnosis or a validated personality test, and it does not replace a professional's evaluation.
Only the size of the tree has some real support, and in a context very different from general personality: a 2015 study with 405 people found it strongly distinguishes patients with cognitive impairment from healthy controls (Stanzani Mase…
See the full methodology
What it measures
A report with 9 indicators: 4 are measured directly on your drawing (size, placement, line thickness, shading) and 5 depend on your answer about what you drew (roots, canopy, branches, fruit, trunk shape).
What model it uses
Koch applied principles of handwriting analysis to the parts of the tree:
- Trunk: self-affirmation.
- Canopy: imaginative and social life.
- Roots: connection with your own reality.
He considered the tree an especially stable symbol, with less conscious censorship than a direct self-portrait.
Where that model comes from
Karl Koch published the Baumtest (Tree Test) in 1949, systematizing an earlier idea from Swiss vocational counselor Emil Jucker.
How the result is calculated
You draw a tree on a single canvas. The size, placement, line thickness, and shading are measured directly; the other 5 indicators depend on 5 short questions about what you drew, because they require recognizing content (roots, canopy, branches, fruit, trunk shape).
What your result means
Each indicator connects your specific value to the reading Koch gave that exact value, and to what the evidence says today about that claim.
What it does NOT mean
This is not a psychological diagnosis or a validated personality test, and it does not replace a professional's evaluation. The classic symbolic interpretation of each part of the tree isn't confirmed by later research: it's a reading from clinical tradition, meant for curiosity and reflection, not a tool that reliably reveals your traits.
Limitations
Only the size of the tree has some real support, and in a context very different from general personality: a 2015 study with 405 people found it strongly distinguishes patients with cognitive impairment from healthy controls (Stanzani Maserati et al., 2015), and a 2025 study found that a scale derived from the drawing may help detect suicidal ideation risk in adolescents (Zhang et al., 2025). Neither of these backs the classic symbolic reading of each part of the tree (roots, canopy, branches, fruit, trunk shape), which lacks controlled studies putting it to the test. In the broadest review of human figure drawings, Motta, Little, and Tobin (1993) reach the same conclusion about this type of technique: it doesn't reliably assess personality, behavior, or emotional state.
Academic references
- Koch, K. (1949). Der Baumtest. Hans Huber.
- Motta, R. W., Little, S. G., y Tobin, M. I. (1993). The use and abuse of human figure drawings. School Psychology Quarterly, 8(3), 162-169.
Frequently asked questions
Is this test a psychological diagnosis?
No, not in any way. Even the original Koch test, applied by a trained clinician, isn't considered a reliable standalone diagnostic tool today. This report is informational: it shows the real method alongside the real scientific evidence about its validity.
Is it true that recent studies support something about this test?
Yes, but with important caveats. A 2015 study found that the size of the tree relative to the page distinguishes patients with cognitive decline from healthy people, and a 2025 study found that a scale derived from the drawing can help detect suicide ideation risk in adolescents. Neither supports the classic symbolic interpretation (what each branch or root supposedly means) that Koch popularized.
Can this test detect cognitive decline or suicide risk?
No. The studies that found something real used specific scoring scales, applied by professionals, in specific clinical populations. Our test is informational and doesn't replace any real clinical assessment.
Can I retake the test?
Yes, as many times as you like. We don't save your drawing or your previous answers.
Is it free?
Yes, it's completely free: no sign-up or payment needed to take the test and see your result.
See all 6 questions
How long does the test take? How many questions does it have?
You draw a tree, then answer 5 short questions about your drawing. About 3-4 minutes in total.
