This test is built on the real method of Ehrig Wartegg (1926), known in its most widespread form (1939) as the Wartegg Zeichentest (WZT), or the 8-field test. Unlike the other drawing tests on this site, it doesn't start from a blank page: each box already has a small stimulus (a dot, a line, a shape), and the task is to complete it with the first thing that comes to mind.
Wartegg designed each of the 8 fields to evoke a different dimension of personality: from the sense of self (field 1) to the bond with one's surroundings (field 8), passing through emotional life, personal goals, one's relationship with rules, conflict, rationality, and emotional sensitivity.
A real limit of this online test
Genuine clinical interpretation of the Wartegg doesn't just look at where or how much you draw, but what you draw (a boat, a face, a landscape) and with what quality, something that requires a trained professional's judgment. Our report doesn't pretend to automate that recognition: it shows what each field assesses according to the method, whether or not you added something to the stimulus, and the real evidence on the technique as a whole.
A canvas drawn with a mouse will never capture the nuance of a real pencil stroke. We're not claiming diagnostic precision, and neither does the original test without a trained professional interpreting it.
Sources
- Grønnerød, J. S., & Grønnerød, C. (2012). The Wartegg Zeichen Test: A literature overview and a meta-analysis of reliability and validity. Psychological Assessment, 24(2), 476-489.
- Souza, C. V. R., Primi, R., & Miguel, F. K. (2007). Validity of the Wartegg Test: correlation with the 16PF, BPR-5, and job performance. Avaliação Psicológica, 6, 39-49.
All possible results
Your Wartegg Test Report
The 8 fields of the Wartegg method, each with what it assesses according to the original technique, and what the scientific evidence says today about the test as a whole.
See the detail
Ehrig Wartegg created his technique in 1926, published in its 8-field form in 1939. The most cited meta-analysis (Grønnerød & Grønnerød, 2012) found reasonably high inter-rater reliability (r = 0.74), but much more modest validity (r = 0.33 in the best-designed studies). An earlier study (Souza, Primi, & Miguel, 2007), comparing the Wartegg with the 16PF and the BPR-5 and with the real job performance of 121 people, found few significant correlations.
This doesn't mean completing these 8 stimuli says nothing about you: it means it's scored more reliably than it predicts. This report exists to show that with rigor, not to diagnose anything about you or evaluate you for a job.
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 on the test's 8 fields : what personality dimension each one assesses according to the original method, and whether or not you added something to the stimulus already drawn.
This is not a psychological diagnosis or a job-selection assessment, and it does not replace the evaluation of a trained professional.
The most cited meta-analysis on this technique (Grønnerød and Grønnerød, 2012) found reasonably high inter-rater reliability (0.74), but much more modest validity (0.33, around 11% of variance explained): it's scored consistently, but pred…
See the full methodology
What it measures
A report on the test's 8 fields: what personality dimension each one assesses according to the original method, and whether or not you added something to the stimulus already drawn.
What model it uses
Each of the 8 fields, with a small pre-drawn stimulus (a dot, a line, a shape), would evoke a different dimension:
- Fields 1 and 8: sense of self and connection with the environment.
- Fields 2 and 7: the emotional world and emotional sensitivity.
- Fields 3 and 6: personal goals and rationality.
- Fields 4 and 5: relationship with rules and conflict.
Where that model comes from
Ehrig Wartegg designed the technique in 1926, known in its most widespread form (1939) as the Wartegg Zeichentest (WZT), or the 8-field test.
How the result is calculated
You complete each of the 8 boxes starting from the stimulus already drawn. The real clinical interpretation analyzes what you drew over each stimulus and with what quality, an expert judgment this report doesn't automate: instead, it shows what each field assesses according to the original method, without inventing a reading of the specific content of your drawing.
What your result means
The result describes what each of the 8 fields assesses according to Wartegg's method, and what the evidence says about the reliability and validity of the technique as a whole.
What it does NOT mean
This is not a psychological diagnosis or a job-selection assessment, and it does not replace the evaluation of a trained professional. It's a reading from clinical tradition, meant for curiosity and reflection, not a tool that reliably reveals your traits.
Limitations
The most cited meta-analysis on this technique (Grønnerød and Grønnerød, 2012) found reasonably high inter-rater reliability (0.74), but much more modest validity (0.33, around 11% of variance explained): it's scored consistently, but predicts little. An earlier study, comparing the test with the 16PF, the BPR-5, and the actual job performance of 121 people, found few significant correlations (Souza, Primi, and Miguel, 2007). The family of drawing tests in general also has a weak empirical base: Motta, Little, and Tobin (1993) conclude that this type of drawing doesn't reliably assess personality, behavior, or emotional state.
Academic references
- Wartegg, E. (1939). Der Wartegg-Zeichentest. Barth Verlag.
- 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 or a hiring assessment?
No, not under any circumstances. The real Wartegg test is used in hiring processes in some countries, but it requires a trained professional interpreting the content of each drawing. This report is informational: it shows the real method alongside the real scientific evidence about its reliability and validity.
Why doesn't the report tell me what my drawing means?
Because genuine Wartegg interpretation requires recognizing WHAT you drew on each stimulus (an object, a scene, something abstract) and assessing it by criteria of form and execution, an expert judgment this online test can't honestly automate. Instead of inventing an interpretation of your specific drawing, we show you what each field assesses according to the original method.
How reliable is this test, according to the evidence?
The most cited meta-analysis (Grønnerød & Grønnerød, 2012) found that different raters score the same drawing in a reasonably similar way (reliability of 0.74 on average), but that the test's ability to predict real personality traits is much more modest (0.33 in the best-designed studies).
Can I retake the test?
Yes, as many times as you want. We don't save your drawings 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 complete the 8 boxes of the Wartegg test, each from its own stimulus. About 5-7 minutes in total.
