Portrait Values Questionnaire (PVQ)

1. Abstract

The Portrait Values Questionnaire (PVQ), formulated by cross-cultural psychologist Shalom H. Schwartz and colleagues, is an empirically validated psychometric instrument designed to measure universal human value priorities. Developed as an alternative to the earlier, highly abstract Schwartz Value Survey (SVS), the PVQ reduces cognitive burden by presenting respondents with short verbal portraits of individual people describing their goals, aspirations, and wishes. The standard 40-item PVQ assesses ten motivationally distinct basic human values: Self-Direction, Stimulation, Hedonism, Achievement, Power, Security, Conformity, Tradition, Benevolence, and Universalism. These values are organized in a circular motivational structure characterized by two higher-order bipolar dimensions: Openness to Change versus Conservation, and Self-Enhancement versus Self-Transcendence.

Each item in the 40-item masculine or feminine version of the PVQ consists of two sentences implicitly pointing to an underlying motivational goal. Respondents compare the described portrait to themselves using an anchored 6-point response scale ranging from 1 (Not at All Like Me) to 6 (Very Much Like Me). Across numerous cross-national studies involving representative, clinical, and adolescent samples across more than 40 countries, the PVQ has demonstrated robust psychometric properties, including structural construct validity via multidimensional scaling and confirmatory factor analysis, adequate internal consistency reliabilities across varied sociocultural groups, and high convergent validity with the SVS and observed behavioral indices. The instrument addresses acquiescence bias and individual differences in scale use through centered (ipsatized) scoring procedures, making it a foundational tool for comparative sociological, cross-cultural, organizational, and psychological investigations.

2. Keywords

Portrait Values Questionnaire, Schwartz Theory of Basic Human Values, cross-cultural assessment, value priorities, human motivations, multidimensional scaling, self-transcendence, conservation, openness to change, self-enhancement, ipsatized scoring, psychometrics

3. Authors

The Portrait Values Questionnaire was created by an international team of social and cross-cultural psychologists led by Shalom H. Schwartz:

• Shalom H. Schwartz, Ph.D.: Professor Emeritus of Psychology at The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel. Schwartz is the principal architect of the Theory of Basic Human Values, a structural model that has guided value research across social psychology, cross-cultural comparative studies, and political science for over three decades.
• Gila Melech, Ph.D.: Department of Psychology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel.
• Arielle Lehmann, Ph.D.: Department of Psychology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel.
• Steven Burgess, Ph.D.: Professor of Marketing and International Business, University of Cape Town, South Africa, whose work focused on testing the PVQ across diverse socioeconomic strata.
• Mark Harris, Ph.D.: Department of Psychology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel.
• Varda Owens, Ph.D.: Center for Assessment and Evaluation, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel.

4. Purpose

The central purpose of the Portrait Values Questionnaire (PVQ) is to operationalize and measure the universal human values identified in Schwartz’s theoretical framework without demanding the elevated level of abstract, decontextualized cognitive processing required by previous inventories. Prior to the development of the PVQ, the primary vehicle for empirical investigations into basic human values was the 57-item Schwartz Value Survey (SVS). While the SVS demonstrated rigorous structural validity among university students and educated adults, it exhibited distinct limitations when applied to general community populations, adolescents, elderly individuals, or populations with lower levels of formal education. In the SVS, respondents are instructed to rate abstract nouns (such as “EQUALITY,” “PLEASURE,” or “SOCIAL ORDER”) on a 9-point scale of importance as guiding principles in their lives. This format requires high verbal reasoning, complex metacognitive appraisal, and meta-attitudinal reflection.

Schwartz and his colleagues devised the PVQ to bypass these conceptual and linguistic barriers. By transforming abstract value concepts into concrete, third-person “portraits” that describe what a fictional person wants, cherishes, or strives for, the PVQ shifts the psychological task from explicit value evaluation to social comparison and self-other projection. When an individual answers the question, “How much is this person like you?”, they spontaneously project their own underlying priorities onto the behavioral and motivational indicators embedded in the portrait. This design significantly broadens the demographic applicability of basic value assessment, enabling inclusive sampling across divergent educational, developmental, and cultural strata.

In research contexts, the PVQ serves as a primary measurement instrument for testing hypotheses linking personal value priorities to everyday behavior, political attitudes, voting choices, environmental actions, intergroup prejudices, and subjective well-being. In organizational settings, the instrument is frequently implemented to assess person-organization value congruence, team dynamics, leadership ethics, and workplace socialization. In clinical and counseling applications, the PVQ provides clinicians with insight into fundamental motivational conflicts, such as existential dilemmas between autonomy (Self-Direction) and family obligations (Conformity/Tradition), facilitating culturally informed interventions.

5. Psychological Construct

The psychological construct assessed by the PVQ is that of Basic Human Values. Schwartz defines values as desirable, trans-situational goals, varying in importance, that serve as guiding principles in the life of a person or other social entity. Values are characterized by six formal features: they are beliefs linked indelibly to affect; they refer to desirable goals that motivate action; they transcend specific actions and situations; they serve as standards or criteria for evaluating actions, policies, people, and events; they are ordered by importance relative to one another; and the relative importance of multiple values guides human behavior.

The standard 40-item PVQ delineates ten motivationally distinct basic values, grouped into four overarching higher-order dimensions:

1. Self-Direction (Items 1, 11, 22, 34)

The central motivational goal of Self-Direction is independent thought and action—choosing, creating, and exploring. Derived from organismic needs for autonomy, mastery, and control, this value encompasses creativity, curiosity, self-reliance, and freedom of decision-making. Individuals prioritizing Self-Direction resist external constraints and strive for intellectual autonomy.

2. Stimulation (Items 6, 15, 30)

Stimulation is rooted in the biological need for variety, excitement, novelty, and optimal arousal. Its defining motivational goal is novelty and challenge in life. High scorers actively seek out novel adventures, unpredictability, and risk-taking opportunities to maintain high levels of physiological and psychological activation.

3. Hedonism (Items 10, 26, 37)

Derived from physical organismic needs and the gratification associated with satisfying them, Hedonism centers on pleasure and sensuous gratification for oneself. It encapsulates enjoyment of life, indulgence, self-gratification, and the proactive pursuit of pleasant experiences.

4. Achievement (Items 4, 13, 24, 32)

The primary motivational goal of Achievement is personal success through demonstrating competence according to prevailing social standards. Competent performance is judged against social benchmarks to obtain social approval, admiration, and personal validation. Unlike Power, Achievement focuses on the active demonstration of recognized skills rather than resource control.

5. Power (Items 2, 17, 39)

The defining goal of Power is the attainment of social status, prestige, and control or dominance over people and resources. Rooted in the functional requirements of social institutions for resource management and hierarchical order, Power involves aspirations for wealth, authority, command, and leadership.

6. Security (Items 5, 14, 21, 31, 35)

Security involves safety, harmony, and stability of society, of relationships, and of self. It derives from basic individual and group requirements to reduce vulnerability, danger, and uncertainty. It bridges individual physical well-being (health, personal safety, orderly environments) and wider macro-social security (national defense, social order, political stability).

7. Conformity (Items 7, 16, 28, 36)

The defining motivational goal of Conformity is restraint of actions, inclinations, and impulses likely to upset or harm others and violate social expectations or norms. Derived from the requirement that individuals inhabit smooth-functioning groups, it manifests as obedience, dutifulness, self-restraint, respect for parents and elders, and adherence to societal rules.

8. Tradition (Items 9, 20, 25, 38)

Tradition involves respect, commitment, and acceptance of the customs and ideas that traditional culture or religion provide the self. Traditional groups demand solidarity and survival through established symbolic practices. Sub-constructs include cultural and religious piety, modesty, devotion, and acceptance of life circumstances.

9. Benevolence (Items 12, 18, 27, 33)

Benevolence focuses on the preservation and enhancement of the welfare of people with whom one is in frequent personal contact (the “in-group”). Emerging from the evolutionary and social necessity of smooth in-group functioning, it emphasizes loyalty, honesty, forgiveness, helpfulness, and active caring for family members, friends, and close peers.

10. Universalism (Items 3, 8, 19, 23, 29, 40)

Universalism is defined by understanding, appreciation, tolerance, and protection for the welfare of all people and for nature. It broadens the scope of moral concern far beyond the immediate in-group to encompass all humanity and the planetary ecosystem. Sub-facets include social justice, equality, world peace, open-minded tolerance, and environmental preservation.

6. Theoretical Framework

The PVQ is grounded in the Schwartz Theory of Basic Human Values (Schwartz, 1992; Schwartz & Bilsky, 1987), an evolutionary and functionalist framework positing that human values represent cognitive representations of three universal requirements of human existence: biological needs of the organism, social interactional requirements for coordinated interpersonal behavior, and survival and welfare needs of social collectives and groups.

A central theoretical premise of the model is that the ten values form a circular motivational continuum (often referred to as a circumplex or quasi-circumplex structure). The closer any two values are to each other along the perimeter of the circle, the more similar their underlying motivations; conversely, the greater the distance between any two values, the more antagonistic their underlying motivations. Pursuing values located on opposite sides of the circle typically produces psychological, behavioral, and practical conflict, whereas pursuing adjacent values generates psychological harmony.

This dynamic circular structure is organized into two orthogonal, higher-order bipolar dimensions:

• Openness to Change versus Conservation: This axis contrasts values that emphasize independence of thought, action, and feelings and readiness for change (Self-Direction, Stimulation, and in part Hedonism) with values that emphasize self-restriction, preservation of the past, protection of stability, and resistance to change (Security, Conformity, and Tradition).
• Self-Enhancement versus Self-Transcendence: This axis contrasts values that emphasize the pursuit of one’s own self-interests, relative success, and dominance over others (Power, Achievement, and in part Hedonism) with values that emphasize transcendence of selfish concerns and active promotion of the welfare of others and nature (Universalism and Benevolence).

The theoretical framework also groups values according to their relationship to anxiety. Schwartz noted that Conservation values (Security, Conformity, Tradition) and Power values are fundamentally anxiety-avoidant; they function to manage uncertainty, avert vulnerability, and defend the ego against perceived threats. In contrast, Openness to Change values (Self-Direction, Stimulation) and Self-Transcendence values (Universalism, Benevolence) are relatively anxiety-free; they represent growth, autonomy, self-actualization, and prosocial engagement.

7. Validity

The psychometric validity of the PVQ has been investigated across dozens of multinational investigations involving hundreds of thousands of participants:

Construct and Structural Validity

Structural validity has traditionally been established through multidimensional scaling (MDS) using non-metric Proxscal or Alscal algorithms. In these analyses, inter-item correlations are mapped into a two-dimensional Euclidean space. When items from the PVQ are analyzed, they consistently separate into ten discrete, bounded motivational sectors ordered according to theoretical expectations (Schwartz et al., 2001; Schwartz, 2012). Deviations from the circular order are rare, occurring predominantly between closely aligned adjacent values (e.g., Tradition and Conformity, or Universalism and Benevolence).

Convergent and Discriminant Validity

Convergent validity has been established by correlating individual scores on the PVQ with the corresponding 57 items of the Schwartz Value Survey (SVS). Studies across Germany, Israel, South Africa, and the United States reported average cross-instrument convergent correlations between matching value constructs ranging from r = .52 to .78, demonstrating that the concrete portrait format measures the same conceptual targets as the abstract noun format. Discriminant validity was demonstrated as correlations between non-adjacent and opposing value constructs (e.g., Power and Universalism) were systematically negative or near-zero after partialling out mean scale usage.

Criterion and Predictive Validity

The PVQ displays pronounced criterion-related validity across diverse psychological, political, and behavioral outcomes:

• Political Orientation and Voting Behavior: Conservation values (Security, Tradition, Conformity) positively predict conservative and right-wing political party affiliation, whereas Universalism and Self-Direction strongly predict support for progressive, liberal, and green political movements (Schwartz, 2012).
• Pro-Environmental Actions: The Universalism subscale consistently exhibits significant positive predictive paths toward environmentally conscious consumption, energy conservation, and ecological activism (r = .35 to .55).
• Altruism and Volunteering: High Benevolence and Universalism scores reliably predict engagement in volunteer work, spontaneous helping behaviors, and charitable donations, whereas Power scores correlate negatively with these prosocial actions.
• Risk-Taking and Health Behaviors: Stimulation and Hedonism predict participation in extreme sports, substance use, and impulsive leisure choices, whereas Security and Conformity negatively predict physical health risk-taking.

8. Reliability

Evaluating the internal consistency reliability of the PVQ requires considering the multi-faceted nature of each basic value and the small number of items assigned to each subscale (ranging from 3 to 6 items):

• Internal Consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha): In typical adult and adolescent populations across Western and non-Western societies, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the 10 basic values generally range from .58 to .83. Values with broader, heterogeneous content domains (such as Universalism, which encompasses societal justice, intergroup harmony, and environmental protection) or shorter scale lengths (such as Stimulation and Hedonism, each containing only 3 items) frequently yield alpha values between .60 and .72, which is acceptable for short scales measuring broad motivational constructs (Schwartz et al., 2001; Schwartz & Boehnke, 2004). Subscales with more focused behavioral domains, such as Power and Security, often achieve alpha coefficients above .75.
• Composite Reliability: In structural equation modeling studies, composite reliability coefficients (ρ_c) for the latent value factors routinely exceed .70, meeting standard benchmarks for construct stability.
• Test-Retest Reliability: Longitudinal and test-retest evaluations over intervals ranging from 4 weeks to 2 years demonstrate high temporal stability. Test-retest stability coefficients for individual value priorities range from r = .68 to .84 across non-turbulent life phases, confirming that value priorities represent stable, enduring psychological traits while retaining sensitivity to major macroeconomic, developmental, or existential transitions.

9. Factor Analysis

Because the Schwartz value model posits a continuous circular structure rather than completely independent clusters, testing its factor structure via traditional exploratory factor analysis (EFA) or confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) presented initial methodological challenges:

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

In a seminal psychometric study, Schwartz and Boehnke (2004) tested the theoretical 10-value circumplex structure across multi-national samples using structural equation modeling. They modeled the ten values as correlated latent factors and specified adjacent factors to have higher positive correlations, orthogonal factors to have near-zero correlations, and diametrically opposed factors to have negative correlations. The hypothesized quasi-circumplex 10-factor model demonstrated satisfactory fit indices across independent validation samples:

• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): Values ranged between .045 and .055, falling well below the recommended threshold of .08.
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): Estimates ranged between .040 and .048 (with 90% confidence intervals below .050), indicating close fit to the population.
• Comparative Fit Index (CFI) / Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI): When adjacent cross-loadings reflecting item multi-finality were modeled in accordance with the theoretical continuum, CFI and TLI values exceeded .90 to .93.

Measurement Invariance Across Cultures

Extensive multigroup confirmatory factor analyses (MGCFA) conducted across international datasets—including the European Social Survey (ESS) and worldwide academic surveys—have evaluated the measurement equivalence of the PVQ. The PVQ generally establishes configural invariance (identical factor loading patterns) and metric invariance (equal factor loadings across nations and demographic groups). This establishes that the underlying value constructs have equivalent psychological meaning across diverse cultural contexts, permitting valid cross-cultural comparisons of regression coefficients, correlations, and associative dynamics.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

The Portrait Values Questionnaire (PVQ-40) is administered as an individual or group paper-and-pencil inventory or via digital testing platforms.

• Construct Assessed: Basic Human Values (10 universal value motivations).
• Item Format: Third-person descriptive verbal portraits consisting of two distinct sentences. The first sentence describes what is important to the person; the second sentence describes the person’s feelings, desires, or behavioral inclinations.
• Versions: Gender-matched versions are standard. The masculine version uses male pronouns (“he,” “him,” “his”), whereas the feminine version uses female pronouns (“she,” “her,” “hers”).
• Number of Items: 40 items.
• Response Scale: 6-point Likert-type response scale with options:
  • 1 = Not at All Like Me
  • 2 = Not Like Me
  • 3 = A Little Like Me
  • 4 = Somewhat Like Me
  • 5 = Like Me
  • 6 = Very Much Like Me
• Subscale Item Composition:
  • Conformity (4 items): Items 7, 16, 28, 36
  • Tradition (4 items): Items 9, 20, 25, 38
  • Benevolence (4 items): Items 12, 18, 27, 33
  • Universalism (6 items): Items 3, 8, 19, 23, 29, 40
  • Self-Direction (4 items): Items 1, 11, 22, 34
  • Stimulation (3 items): Items 6, 15, 30
  • Hedonism (3 items): Items 10, 26, 37
  • Achievement (4 items): Items 4, 13, 24, 32
  • Power (3 items): Items 2, 17, 39
  • Security (5 items): Items 5, 14, 21, 31, 35
• Higher-Order Quadrant Subscales:
  • Openness to Change: Self-Direction, Stimulation, and Hedonism.
  • Conservation: Security, Conformity, and Tradition.
  • Self-Enhancement: Power, Achievement, and Hedonism.
  • Self-Transcendence: Universalism and Benevolence.
• Scoring and Ipsatization Rules:
  1. Raw Value Scores: Compute the mean of the items comprising each of the 10 basic values.
  2. Mean Individual Scale Use (MRAT): Calculate the respondent’s overall mean score across all 40 items. This represents the participant’s characteristic scale use (response style and acquiescence bias).
  3. Centered (Ipsatized) Scores: Subtract the participant’s MRAT from their raw subscale score for each of the 10 values: Centered Score = Raw Value Mean - MRAT. Centered scores represent the relative priority of each value within the individual’s overall value hierarchy, controlling for scale usage tendencies. Centered scores are essential for valid correlational, regression, and cross-cultural analyses.

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The standard 40-item Portrait Values Questionnaire was first published in 2001 by Shalom H. Schwartz, Gila Melech, Arielle Lehmann, Steven Burgess, Mark Harris, and Varda Owens in the Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. In subsequent years, modified variants—such as the 21-item PVQ utilized in the European Social Survey (ESS) and the 57-item PVQ-RR (Revised)—were introduced to accommodate specific survey constraints and theoretical refinements.

The Portrait Values Questionnaire is considered an open-access psychometric instrument for non-profit academic research, scientific studies, university training, and educational use. No licensing fee is required when used for non-commercial scholarly purposes. Professor Shalom H. Schwartz has historically made the instrument, its scoring syntax, and translation protocols available to the international scientific community. In academic publications and theses, proper citation of the primary validation articles (e.g., Schwartz et al., 2001; Schwartz, 2012) is expected. Commercial applications, corporate consulting use, or integration into proprietary software assessment systems require formal permission and authorization.

12. References

• Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6
• Schwartz, S. H. (1996). Value priorities and behavior: Applying a theory of integrated value systems. In C. Seligman, J. M. Olson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The Psychology of Values: The Ontario Symposium (Vol. 8, pp. 1–24). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
• Schwartz, S. H. (2012). An overview of the Schwartz theory of basic values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), Article 11. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1116
• Schwartz, S. H., & Bardi, A. (1997). Influences of adaptation to communist rule on value priorities in Eastern Europe. Political Psychology, 18(2), 385–410. https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00062
• Schwartz, S. H., & Bilsky, W. (1987). Toward a universal psychological structure of human values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(3), 550–562. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.53.3.550
• Schwartz, S. H., & Boehnke, K. (2004). Evaluating the structure of human values with confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 38(3), 230–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00069-2
• Schwartz, S. H., Melech, G., Lehmann, A., Burgess, S., Harris, M., & Owens, V. (2001). Extending the cross-cultural validity of the basic human values with a different method of measurement. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(5), 519–542. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022101032005001

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)