The Self-Compassion Scale and Test (Incl. PDF)

self-compassion scaleWhether we like it or not, life is full of ups and downs. The human experience is often peppered with uncomfortable or unpleasant experiences and emotions.

Self-compassion presents an opportunity to understand, acknowledge, and transform personal suffering through self-kindness, mindfulness, and an understanding that adversity is an inevitable part of life.

When we learn how to practice compassion from within, we begin to care more about ourselves and strive to alleviate our own suffering. We learn to be less self-critical and instead treat ourselves with kindness when faced with undesirable experiences.

The integration of compassion-based approaches within the field of psychology and psychotherapy is increasing exponentially. Alongside this expanding clinical interest, it has been necessary to develop tools by which self-compassion and other related constructs can be tested and measured.

In the following article, we will look at how we can best test self-compassion, the structure and validity of Kristin Neff’s Self-Compassion Scale, and alternative methods by which self-compassion can be assessed.

Before you read on, we thought you might like to download our 3 Self-Compassion Exercises for free. These detailed, science-based exercises will not only help you increase the compassion and kindness you show yourself but will also give you the tools to help your clients, students, or employees show more compassion to themselves.

How Can We Best Test Self-Compassion?

Testing self-compassion and introducing related practices to your clients can be enormously healing: by developing compassion for themselves, they can more easily move through difficult material, forgive themselves and others, and become more productive and happy human beings (Neff, 2015). Understanding vulnerabilities and practicing more self-kindness is at the very heart of self-compassion.

So how can we best test self-compassion? Despite the growing enthusiasm of clinicians and researchers, there remains an ongoing debate in regard to the true definitions of compassion and self-compassion, and whether the two should be considered different constructs (Strauss et al., 2016).

This uncertainty has resulted in a number of measures that test compassion and self-compassion from various psychological standpoints. For instance, the Relational Compassion Scale (Hacker, 2008) measures self-compassion as a subscale of compassion for others, whereas the Self-Compassion Scale (Neff, 2003a) is a method that measures individual differences in compassion towards oneself.

The most commonly adopted definition of self-compassion is that of Neff (2003a) who conceptualizes self-compassion from a Buddhist perspective as having three main components: kindness, common humanity, and mindfulness. As such, many tests of self-compassion include these three components to some degree in order to measure the construct.

What is the Self-Compassion Scale (SCS)? (Incl. PDF)

Functional Assertiveness ScaleThe Self-Compassion Scale (SCS; Neff, 2003a) was the first tool of its kind and specifically developed as a method by which individual differences in self-compassion could be assessed.

In its early form, the SCS was hypothesized to be a three-factor scale that included self-kindness, common humanity, and mindfulness.

However, throughout its development it became apparent that the scale should have six factors – the three core components mentioned above and their “negative” opposite constructs of self-judgment, isolation, and over-identification – which represents compassionate versus uncompassionate behavior and a self-compassionate frame of mind (Neff, 2003b).

The self-report 26-item SCS explicitly represents the thoughts, emotions, and behaviors associated with the three components of self-compassion and includes items that measure how often people respond to feelings of inadequacy or suffering with each of six components:

Self-Kindness vs. Self-Judgment

Self-compassion entails being warm and understanding toward ourselves when we suffer, fail or feel inadequate, rather than punishing ourselves with self-criticism (Neff, 2003a). We cannot always achieve exactly what we want. When this reality is denied or fought against suffering increases in the form of stress, frustration, and self-criticism.

Self-compassionate individuals are those who recognize that imperfection and failure are inevitable, and thus tend to be more gentle with themselves when confronted with distressing or unpleasant experiences rather than getting angry when life falls short of self-imposed ideals (Neff, 2015).

Common Humanity vs. Isolation

A self-compassionate individual recognizes that challenges and personal failures are something we all share. They are part of the human experience. In this way, self-compassion helps us understand that suffering is something we all go through and thus helps negate feelings of isolation (Neff, 2003a).

Mindfulness vs. Over-Identification

Self-compassion is intimately tied to the practice of mindfulness; that is paying attention to the present moment with complete acceptance of thoughts, feelings, and bodily sensations. We cannot ignore our pain and feel compassion for it at the same time (Bishop, Lau, Shapiro, Carlson, Anderson, Carmody, 2004). Through self-compassion, negative emotions are accepted rather than suppressed, denied or exaggerated.

The Self-Compassion Scale has been used in a multitude of studies to examine the effects and impact that self-compassion can have on a number of areas. Results from a selection of investigations utilizing the SCS indicate that self-compassion:

  • Improves self-reported emotional wellbeing in adolescents and adults (Bluth & Blanton, 2012).
  • Reduces self-judgment, feelings of isolation, and over-identification (Neff, 2016).
  • Mediates the impact of body dissatisfaction and unfavorable social comparisons on psychological quality of life (Duarte, Ferreira, Trindade, & Pinto-Gouveia, 2015).
  • Can assist in the reduction of compassion fatigue and burnout in practitioners and caregivers (Beaumont, Durkin, Martins, & Carson, 2015).
  • Significantly reduces shame-proneness, irrational beliefs, and symptoms of social anxiety (Candea & Tatar, 2018).
  • Is negatively associated with procrastination and maladaptive perfectionism (Barnard & Curry, 2011).
  • Results in more motivation to change for the better, try harder to learn, and avoid repeating past mistakes particularly with health-related behaviors such as sticking to a diet, quitting smoking, or starting a fitness regimen (Germer & Neff, 2013).

The Self-Compassion Scale is a completely free resource and has been translated into 18 languages including; Dutch, French, German, Greek, Turkish, Italian, Portuguese, Brazilian Portuguese, Spanish, Japanese, Korean, Chinese.

The Short Form Scale

While the Self-Compassion Scale (SCS) is undoubtedly the most commonly utilized measure of self-compassion, concerns were raised that the 26-item SCS was too burdensome or semantically complex for use by some individuals (Kemppainen et al., 2013).

A shortened yet structurally equivalent 12-item Self-Compassion Scale-Short Form (SCS-SF) (Raes, Pommier, Neff, & Van Gucht, 2011) was developed as a way to reduce this burden and offer researchers an opportunity to gather perspectives from individuals who would be unable or unwilling to take the original long-form version.

The SCS-SF was developed by selecting two items from each of the original six SCS subscales that showed the highest correlations with the overall scale and assesses various aspects of self-compassion including one’s sense of a common humanity, mindfulness, and self-kindness.

While the short-form scale represents a valid alternative to the long-form SCS when looking at overall self-compassion scores, it has been found to be less reliable when the area of interest lies within the subscales and their negative counterparts (Raes, Pommier, Neff, & Van Gucht, 2011). If particular information on each dimension of compassion is required, the long form is recommended.

A Look at How Scoring Works

Statements on the Self-Compassion Scale are scored on a Likert scale of 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always).

The collected data can be utilized in two ways:

1. To calculate an overall compassion score – Items representing uncompassionate responses to inadequacy or suffering (the self-judgment, isolation, and over-identification subscales) are reverse-coded only when calculating the overall compassion score. In this way, higher scores represent a lower frequency of these responses.

For instance, the statement ’I can be a bit cold-hearted towards myself when I’m experiencing suffering’ is related to self-judgment and as such, a response of ‘almost always’ is scored as 1 rather than 5 when calculating an overall compassion score.

In order to calculate a total compassion score, take the mean score of each subscale (after reverse scoring where necessary) and compute a total mean.

2. To calculate individual subscale scores – If you plan to examine the subscales separately, do not reverse the scoring of any item. Scoring on the subscales of these items should only be reversed when calculating the overall compassion score.

Scoring the SCS Long-Form

Coding Key – statements for each subscale within the SCS are numbered as follows:

  • Self-Kindness Items: 5, 12, 19, 23, 26
  • Self-Judgment Items: 1, 8, 11, 16, 21 (reverse score when calculating overall self-compassion)
  • Common Humanity Items: 3, 7, 10, 15
  • Isolation Items: 4, 13, 18, 25 (reverse score when calculating overall self-compassion)
  • Mindfulness Items: 9, 14, 17, 22
  • Over-identified Items: 2, 6, 20, 24 (reverse score when calculating overall self-compassion)

It is important to remember that higher averages for self-judgment, isolation, and over-identification subscales indicate less self-compassion before reverse-coding and more after reverse-coding.

Scoring the SCS Short-Form

Coding Key – statements for each subscale within the SCS-SF are numbered as follows:

  • Self-Kindness Items: 2, 6
  • Self-Judgment Items: 11, 12 (reverse score when calculating overall self-compassion)
  • Common Humanity Items: 5, 10
  • Isolation Items: 4, 8 (reverse score when calculating overall self-compassion)
  • Mindfulness Items: 3, 7
  • Over-identified Items: 1, 9 (reverse score when calculating overall self-compassion)

As with the long-form version, subscale scores are determined by calculating the mean of subscale item responses. In order to compute overall self-compassion, reverse score the negative subscale items of self-judgment, isolation, and over-identification and then calculate the total mean.

Interpretation of Scores

As a rough guide, average scores for the Self-Compassion Scale are around 3.0 on the 1-5 Likert scale, a score of 1-2.5 indicates low self-compassion, 2.5-3.5 indicates moderate, and 3.5-5.0 is an indication of high self-compassion (Neff, 2003a).

Scores from each subscale can predict a number of potential outcomes. For instance, a high score on the self-kindness subscale is a significant predictor of happiness while a low score is predictive of anxiety. Higher scores in the mindfulness subscale indicate greater life satisfaction while over-identification is an indicator of depression and isolation is a strong predictor for stress (Neff, 2015).

More on mindful self-compassion here.

In essence, higher self-compassionate behaviors are directly related to increased positive states of mind like happiness and life-satisfaction, while higher uncompassionate behaviors are directly related to negative mind-states like depression, stress, and anxiety.

While the reliability of the subscales on the short form is weaker than they are for the full version, the correlation in overall self-compassion scores between the two versions is extremely high (Neff, 2015).

Pros and Cons: A Look at the Validity

The Self-Compassion Scale has been extensively applied in clinical and health psychology research in order to investigate the protective influence of self-compassion on psychological wellbeing. Although generally accepted as a reliable and valid tool to measure self-compassion, the SCS has received criticism over whether or not the factor structure generalizes across populations (Williams, Dalgleish, Karl & Kuyken, 2014).

Multiple studies have been carried out in order to test the validity and reliability of the SCS when translated into other languages and applied to different cultures. For instance, results from a general population sample study in Germany advocated against the use of a total score across all SCS items but found that independent subscale scores captured a positive factor and a negative factor when administering the German SCS (Coroiu et al., 2018).

Research by Deniz, Kesici, & Sumer (2008) demonstrated that the Turkish version of the SCS is a valid and reliable measure. Similarly, Kotsou & Leys (2016) found that the French version of the SCS is a valid tool for French-speaking researchers and clinicians to effectively assess individual differences in self-compassion in French-speaking populations. Additionally, the psychometric properties and internal reliability scores of the French SCS were found to be significant.

As with the German SCS study mentioned above, other researchers have questioned the reliability of the SCS to calculate an overall self-compassion score – particularly when it includes items representing a lack of self-compassion.

Concerns have been raised that by measuring ‘negative’ components of compassion the SCS is actually measuring self-criticism, rumination, and social isolation, rather than self-compassion. Muris and Petrocchi (2017) suggested that the use of the SCS total score, which includes reverse scored negative subscales, may result in an inflated negative relationship between self-compassion and symptoms of psychopathology.

In response to these criticisms, Neff, Whittaker, & Karl (2017) examined the factor structure of the SCS in four distinct populations; undergraduate students, adults recruited online, meditators, and a fourth group who experienced a recurrent major depressive disorder.

Results from the study indicated that an overall self-compassion factor can effectively explain at least 90% of item variance across student, community, and clinical populations – providing support for the use of a total SCS score to represent overall trait levels of self-compassion.

The Self-Compassion Scale has also received criticism for issues related to psychometric validity: does the scale measure what it purports to measure? Costa et al. (2015) examined the psychometric properties of the SCS by testing the factorial validity and invariance of:

(a) a six-factor model (self-kindness, self-judgment, common humanity, isolation, mindfulness, and over-identification);

(b) a higher order factor model (self-compassion); and

(c) a two-factor model (self-compassionate attitude and self-critical attitude).

Findings from the confirmatory factorial analyses indicated that while coherent intercorrelation among the six subscales could not be explained by a single higher-order latent variable, the two-factor model (self-compassionate attitude and self-critical attitude) showed good internal consistencies, and each factor is better explained by its own observed items rather than by items from a different factor.

The conflicting evidence regarding the factor structure of the SCS has led to disparate views on the relative contribution of positive and negative items to the theoretical components of self-compassion (Pfattheiche, Geiger, Hartung, Weiss, & Schindle, 2017). Put simply, do the negative items within the SCS genuinely reflect the absence of self-compassion?

Other researchers have advocated the use of two independent subscale scores to capture the positive and negative group factors, advising against of the estimation of a single total score (Brenner, Heath, Vogel, & Credé, 2017).

While critics remain, the Self-Compassion Scale and other qualitative self-report measures provide useful data to researchers and to practitioners in terms of case conceptualization and treatment planning. How a client responds to the questionnaire can assist in the identification of treatment self-compassion strategies and techniques.

Furthermore, client’s responses on the SCS can be utilized during the debriefing process to introduce concepts that the client may not have considered, such as the idea of common humanity or being able to take perspective of how they behave in their own relationship with themselves (LeJeune, 2016).


  • The Self-Compassion scale is a simple tool to use, administer, and score. It has been translated into 18 languages and is freely available for use by researchers, practitioners, students, and the general public.
  • The SCS has shown internal consistency and test-retest reliability, significant positive correlations with social connectedness, emotional intelligence, and life satisfaction, and significant negative correlations with self-criticism, perfectionism, depression, and anxiety (Baer, 2006).
  • The shortened SCS instrument has adequate internal consistency and a robust correlation with the SCS-Long form (Raes et al., 2011).
  • The SCS as currently written and analyzed is not only useful for facilitating research, but also for clinicians trying to help their clients learn to be more self-compassionate (Neff, 2016).
  • Several studies utilizing the SCS demonstrate good predictive validity, with positive correlations between self-compassion and mental health signs. For instance, high levels of self-compassion predict happiness, optimism and life satisfaction while lower self-compassion is a predictor of depression and anxiety (Neff & Vonk, 2009).


  • Despite the scale’s extensive use, some consider the limited understanding of how the six components of the SCS interact with each other as problematic. Cleare, Gumley, & Cleare (2018) suggested that more robust analyses are required in order to understand if all the factors contribute equally to a person’s compassion or if one area is potentially more important than another.
  • Potential incongruities in the factor structures found by previous researchers indicate that the structure of the SCS could be potentially unstable and would benefit from further analysis. Neff herself suggested that the higher-order structure may not be the most appropriate conceptualization of compassion (Neff, 2015).
  • The SCS may be better suited to measuring the six components of self-compassion separately than to measuring the overarching construct of self-compassion (Williams, Dalgleish, Karl, & Kuyken, 2014).
  • There are some concerns regarding the validity of the SCS translations in certain cultures. A recent study measuring self-compassion in Chinese Buddhists concluded that the six-factor model was not replicable and suggested that the Western conceptualization of self-compassion is theoretically distinct from the ideas of the East (Zeng, Wei, Oei, & Lui, 2016).

The Work of Brené Brown and Kristin Neff

Brené Brown is a researcher, scholar, and best-selling author who has spent over a decade investigating vulnerability, courage, worthiness, and shame.

Her TEDx talk – The Power of Vulnerability – has been viewed over 35 million times and is one of the top five most viewed TED talks in the world.

For Brown, Kristin Neff’s research was a key piece to understanding that the best way to support ourselves in difficult times is through self-compassion (Brown, 2012).

Brown & Neff are considered by many as the most influential shame, self-criticism and self-compassion researchers to date (Burton, 2016). While the two have collaborated on a number of projects, for the purpose of this article we will focus on their contributions to research on shame and its relationship to self-compassion.

Shame is defined as a negative emotion associated with depression, social anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder and problematic outcomes for wellbeing (Cibich, Woodyatt, & Wenzel, 2016). For Brown (2007), shame is a debilitating inner experience elicited by the negative self-appraisal of one’s entire self and is a direct hindrance to self-compassion – corroding the very part of us that believes we are capable of change.

Despite the inevitability of shame, hope can be found in the guise of shame resilience. According to Shame Resilience Theory (SRT: Brown, 2006), we can learn to move through feelings of shame by engaging in the examination of the self, awareness of cultural context, and intentionality in interpersonal relationships.

Brown proposed that practicing shame resilience takes the form of “reaching out” to others with empathy and non-judgment. This ability to demonstrate empathy for others is inherently linked to the practice of self-compassion, meaning that we must first act compassionately toward our own struggles in order to express compassion to others (Brown, 2006).

Self-compassion is intricately connected to the practice of shame resilience. According to Neff (2009) one of the key characteristics of self-compassion is that it is not dependent upon success or achievement. Consequently, it eliminates critical self-evaluation – a process inherent in shame – because it is not based on self-evaluations, performance, or comparisons to others.

Shame resilience is most commonly measured using the Self-Compassion Scale and the SRT draws directly from Neff’s self-compassion framework – viewing self-kindness, common humanity, and mindfulness as the primary components of self-compassion.

Brown hypothesized that shame requires three things to grow exponentially – secrecy, silence, and judgment – and that the three elements of self-compassion help counteract the three elements of shame in the following ways (Brown, 2014):


Allows us to be aware of our experience of shame and not over-identify with it or avoid it. In essence, mindfulness addresses the silence of shame.

Common humanity:

Addresses the secrecy of shame; we are not alone in how we feel. Understanding that shame is an inherently human trait encourages a connection with others.


Addresses the judgment of shame. Rather than talking to ourselves harshly, we treat ourselves with the care, understanding, and support we need during the experience of shame.

According to Brené Brown (2010), the acknowledgment of personal vulnerabilities such as shame is the key to authenticity; that is the continued practice of letting go of who we’re supposed to be and embracing who we really are. Through self-compassion we can learn to embrace these vulnerabilities rather than allowing them to affect us negatively.

A Look at the Self-Compassion Inventory

While the Self-Compassion Scale was developed as a way to represent the thoughts, emotions, and behaviors associated with the various components of self-compassion, the inventory does not explicitly mention the term ‘self-compassion’. Rather, self-compassion levels are inferred by the examination of responses to the 26 items designed to tap into the three main components of the construct (Kirkpatrick et al., 2007).

The inventory includes statements that measure how often people respond to feelings of inadequacy or suffering with:

  • Self-Kindness -‘I’m kind to myself when I’m experiencing suffering.’, ‘I’m tolerant of my own flaws and inadequacies.
  • Self-Judgment – ‘I’m disapproving and judgmental about my own flaws and inadequacies.’, ‘I’m intolerant and impatient towards those aspects of my personality I don’t like.’
  • Common Humanity – ‘I try to see my failings as part of the human condition.’, ‘When I feel inadequate in some way, I try to remind myself that feelings of inadequacy are shared by most people.
  • Isolation – ‘When I think about my inadequacies it tends to make me feel more separate and cut off from the rest of the world.’, ‘When I fail at something that’s important to me, I tend to feel alone in my failure.
  • Mindfulness – ‘When something painful happens I try to take a balanced view of the situation.’, ‘When something upsets me I try to keep my emotions in balance.
  • Over-Identification – ‘When I’m feeling down I tend to obsess and fixate on everything that’s wrong.’, ‘When I’m feeling down, I tend to feel like most other people are probably happier than I am.

Wording is an important concern with any scale so that it can measure a particular construct over and above the way items are worded. Thus, it is crucial to give careful consideration to these effects in order to properly measure the area of interest (Roszkowski & Soven, 2010).

Statements on the SCS representing a lack of self-compassion are written in such a way that negates confusion from negatively worded items.

For instance, a self-judgment statement written as “I am not disapproving and judgmental about my own flaws and inadequacies,” would require a response of “almost never” from individuals who are high in self-judgment. Thus, items representing uncompassionate behavior are written in a manner that makes them easier to respond to, “I’m disapproving and judgmental about my own flaws and inadequacies”.

Some researchers have advised that the SCS should not measure uncompassionate behavior in its assessment of self-compassion, instead indicating that it should only include items representing compassionate behavior; thus proposing a two-factor model for the SCS (Muris & Petrocci, 2017).

However, Neff argues that conceptualizing the SCS in bi-dimensional terms would greatly limit its ability to explore the differential contribution that the various components of self-compassion make to wellbeing.

Referring to the three positive components as “self-compassion” and the three negative components as “self-criticism” collapses important distinctions between how people emotionally respond to suffering with kindness or self-judgment, cognitively understand their suffering with a sense of common humanity or isolation and pay attention to their suffering mindfully or in an over-identified manner (Neff, 2015).

What Other Assessment Tools are Available?

While the SCS (Neff, 2003a) measures self-compassion as its primary objective, a number of other scales have been developed to measure self-compassion as a subscale of other constructs.

A selection of alternative assessment tools designed to explore and measure the relationship between compassion, self-compassion, and other psychological processes are detailed below.

The Self-Compassion Scale for Children (SCS-C)

Between the ages of 8 and 12, there is a marked increase in self-awareness, self-reflection, and perspective-taking abilities that contribute to the development of a sense of identity and self-concept (Butler, 1998). While the Self-Compassion Scale and the SCS-Short Form have been validated for use with individuals over 14 years, missing from the field was a way to measure self-compassion in children.

The SCS-C is a measure of self-compassion for children under the age of 14. Adapted from the SCS-SF (Raes et al. 2011) the scale consists of twelve self-report items aimed at assessing self-compassion in children and addresses each of the six components within Neff’s definition of self-compassion.

The SCS-C has been adapted for use with younger populations primarily by altering the language so that it is more age appropriate. For example, a statement such as, ‘When I fail at something important to me I become consumed by feelings of inadequacy’ was changed to ‘When I fail at something important to me, I feel like I’m not good enough’. Responses are measured on a five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Always).

The Shortened Self-Compassion Scale for Adolescents

The S-SCS-A (S-SCS-A; Muris, 2016) was developed in order to address the items on the SCS that were considered as being too abstract and obscure for younger participants – especially those with a lower educational level.

Perceived abstract language within the SCS was modified and includes the positive subscales of self-kindness, common humanity, and mindfulness as found in Neff’s SCS. Muris et al. (2016) found preliminary evidence of the scale’s reliability and validity when used with adolescents between the ages of 12–17.

The Quiet Ego Scale

The quiet ego refers to a self-identity that transcends egoism and identifies with a less defensive, balanced stance toward the self and others (Wayment, Bauer, & Sylaska, 2015).

The QES (QES; Wayment, Bauer, & Sylaska, 2015) is a 14-item self-report measure and while it used primarily to measure a number of characteristics such as resilience, coping efficacy, and other indices of wellbeing, it also measures self-compassion as a subscale within the larger construct of self-identity.

The components of common humanity, mindfulness and self-kindness are measured by the scale.

The Relational Compassion Scale

This 16-item self-report scale (RCS; Hacker, 2008) consists of four subscales which measure respondents’ 1) self-compassion, 2) compassion for others, 3) beliefs about how compassionate other people are to each other, and 4) beliefs about how compassionate other people are to them.

Items comprising the self-compassion subscale assess emotional resonance and acting to alleviate personal suffering and have been positively correlated with the Self-Compassion Scale (Hacker, 2008; Neff, 2003a). It should be noted, however, that this correlation is weaker than might be expected given the two methods are supposed to measure the same construct (Strauss, Lever Taylor, Gu, Kuyken, Baer, Jones, & Cavanagh, 2016).

Self-Other Four Immeasurables

The SOFI (SOFI; Kraus & Sears, 2009) is a 16-item instrument designed to assess the four ‘immeasurable’ qualities at the heart of Buddhist teachings, namely: compassion, loving-kindness, joy, and acceptance toward both self and others. Rated on a five-point Likert scale, the SOFI scale consists of four distinct subscales: positive qualities toward the self, positive qualities toward others, negative qualities toward the self and negative qualities toward others.

Examination of reliability and validity showed high internal consistency for the subscales as well as strong concurrent, discriminant, and construct validity. According to Kraus & Sears (2009), while the measurement of self-compassion is relatively understudied, the development of the SOFI scale provides a further method of assessment for use within research on mindfulness, positive psychology, and social psychology.

7 Other Self-Compassion Tests, Quizzes & Questionnaires

You can find an online version of the Self-Compassion Scale (Neff, 2003a) here. While this version is identical in content to the SCS for researchers, the scoring and reverse-scoring for statements are done for you. On completion of the test, you will be provided with scores on self-kindness, self-judgment, common humanity, isolation, mindfulness, an overall self-compassion score, and guidance on how to interpret your results.

This 12-item quiz has been adapted from the original Self-Compassion Scale. You are encouraged to think honestly about how you view yourself and not to think about how others might see you. On completion of the quiz, you will be given a breakdown of how self-compassionate you are from low to high and provided with advice on how best to cultivate more compassion towards yourself.

This brief self-compassion quiz consists of 12 ‘yes’ or ‘no’ statements related to indicators of self-compassion, such as ‘When I fail at something that’s important to me, I tend to feel alone in my failure.’ Developed from the original SCS, this quiz provides instructions on how to score your answers and will provide you with a general understanding of where you lie in terms of self-compassion.

A key component of self-compassion is the absence of self-criticism. High self-judgment and self-criticism are negatively correlated with both compassion for others and compassion for oneself, in fact, we become less compassionate to ourselves and others if we judge ourselves too harshly (Beaumont, Durkin, Martin, & Carson, 2016).

This 21-item Functions of Self-Criticizing/Attacking Scale (Gilbert, Clark, Hempel, Miles, & Irons, 2004) was designed to measure the functions of self-criticism – why people think they self-criticize and self-attack.

This 22-item Self-Criticizing & Self-Reassuring Scale test developed by Gilbert, et al. (2004) is designed to measure self-criticism, self-judgment, and the ability to self-reassure when things go wrong.

The process of self-forgiveness has transformative powers in relation to self-compassion and responses to negative experiences. A person who forgives themselves has the capacity to change the orientation and intrusiveness of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors from negative to neutral, or positive (Thompson & Synder, 2003).

The Heartland Forgiveness Scale is an 18-item self-report questionnaire developed as a method of measuring individual dispositional forgiveness of self, others, and situations beyond anyone’s control. The HFS consists of three six-item subscales (Forgiveness of Self, Forgiveness of Others, and Forgiveness of Situations).

The Compassionate Engagement and Action Scales are a set of three scales designed to measure self-compassion, the ability to be compassionate to others and the ability to receive compassion. Statements within each of these scales reflect six compassion attributes: sensitivity to suffering, sympathy, non-judgment, empathy, distress tolerance and care for wellbeing (Gilbert et al., 2017).


Created by pioneering self-compassion researcher, author, and scholar, Dr. Kristin Neff, Self-Compassion.org is an all-in-one resource for self-compassion research, practices, and exercises. Self-compassion can be considered the heart of mindfulness; it is self-acceptance in the face of sorrow and pain (Neff & Germer, 2017).

Recognizing this relationship, Neff provides an array of free resources and exercises that overlap with some commonly used mindfulness techniques, on the site self-compassion.org.

In addition, a direct quote from Dr. Kristin Neff in our Comments Section below:

Neff et al., (2019) recently conducted the most comprehensive study of self-compassion ever undertaken, examining the factor structure of the SCS in 20 different international samples using 13 different translations, which included community, student, meditator and clinical samples.

Support was found for use of a single SCS score (explaining 95% of the reliable variance in item responding!), six separate sub scale scores, but not two global positive and negative scores.

Moreover, Ferrari et al., (2019) conducted a meta-analysis of 27 RCTs of self-compassion training and found that all six components of self-compassion changed as a result of changing. [Ed: Presumably Dr. Neff meant training] They also found effect sizes for reductions in psychopathology similar to those found in studies examining the correlations between the SCS and psychopathology, countering arguments that the SCS inflates the link between self-compassion and psychopathology.

These articles, with their references, can be found at self-compassion.org.

A Take-Home Message

In a world that seems to revere self-confidence and self-assuredness, we are perhaps overlooking one of the most important skills for living a happier, more satisfying life: self-compassion.

With its innumerable benefits and growing clinical interest, the demand for assessment tools designed to explore and measure self-compassion and other related psychological processes is unsurprising.

The self-compassion assessment tools discussed in this article can provide meaningful information concerning clients, research subjects, and yourself.

Whether they are designed to test self-compassion or other related constructs, the data collated from such self-report measures is often invaluable and the first step to understanding that we are all imperfect people living in an imperfect world – and that’s OK.

For further reading:

We hope you enjoyed reading this article. Don’t forget to download our 3 Self Compassion Exercises for free.


  • Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006). Using Self-Report Assessment Methods to Explore Facets of Mindfulness. Assessment, 13, 27-45.
  • Beaumont, E., Durkin, M., Hollins Martin, C. J., & Carson, J. (2016). Measuring relationships between self‐compassion, compassion fatigue, burnout and wellbeing in student counselors and student cognitive behavioural psychotherapists: a quantitative survey. Counseling and Psychotherapy Research, 16(1), 15-23.
  • Bishop, S. R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L., Anderson, N. D., Carmody, J. (2004). Mindfulness: A proposed operational definition. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11, 230-241.
  • Bluth, K., & Blanton, P. W. (2012). Mindfulness and Self-Compassion: Exploring Pathways to Adolescent Emotional Well-Being. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 1-12.
  • Brenner, R. E., Heath, P. J., Vogel, D. L., & Credé, M. (2017). Two is more valid than one: examining the factor structure of the Self-Compassion Scale (SCS). Journal of Counselling and Psychology, 64, 696–707.
  • Brown, B. (2007): I Thought It Was Just Me (but it isn’t): Telling the Truth About Perfectionism, Inadequacy, and Power. New York:Penguin/Gotham.
  • Brown, B. (2010). The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You’re Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are. New York City, NY: Gotham
  • Brown, B. (2012): Daring Greatly: How the Courage to Be Vulnerable Transforms the Way We Live, Love, Parent, and Lead. New York City, NY: Gotham.
  • Brown, B. (2014). Listening to Shame. TEDxTalk. Retrieved from: https://www.ted.com/talks/brene_brown_listening_to_shame?language=en
  • Cȃndea, D. M., & Szentágotai-Tătar, A. (2018). The Impact of Self-Compassion on Shame-Proneness in Social Anxiety. Mindfulness, 1-9.
  • Cleare, S., Gumley, A., Cleare, C. J. (2018). An Investigation of the Factor Structure of the Self-Compassion Scale. Mindfulness, 9, 618.
  • Cibich, M., Woodyatt, L., & Wenze, M. (2016). Moving beyond “shame is bad”: How a functional emotion can become problematic. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10, 471–483.
  • Coroiu, A., Kwakkenbos, L., Moran, C., Thombs, B., Albani, C., Bourkas, S., (2018) Structural validation of the Self-Compassion Scale with a German general population sample. PLoS ONE 13, 2.
  • Costa, J., Maroco, J., Pinto-Gouveia, J., Ferreira, C., & Castilho, P. (2015). Validation of the Psychometric Properties of the Self-Compassion Scale. Testing the Factorial Validity and Factorial Invariance of the Measure among Borderline Personality Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, Eating Disorder and General Populations. Clinical Psychology and psychotherapy.
  • Dawson, R. C., Phillips, J. C., Sefcik, E., Rivero Mendez, M., & Kirksey, K. M. (2013). Use of a brief version of the self-compassion inventory with an international sample of people with HIV/AIDS. AIDS Care, 12, 1513-1519.
  • Deniz, M. E., Kesici, S., & Sumer, A. S. (2008). The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Self-Compassion Scale. Social Behavior and Personality, 36, 1151-1160.
  • Duarte, C., Ferreira, C., Trindade, I. A., & Pinto-Gouveia, J. (2015). Body image and college women’s quality of life: The importance of being self-compassionate. Journal of health psychology, 20(6), 754-764.
  • Feldman, G., Greeson, J., & Senville, J. (2010). Differential effects of mindful breathing, progressive muscle relaxation, and loving-kindness meditation on decentering and negative reactions to repetitive thoughts. Behaviour research and therapy, 48, 1002–1011.
  • Germer, C. K., Siegel, R. D., & Fulton, P. R. (Eds.). (2005). Mindfulness and psychotherapy. New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.
  • Germer, C. K., & Neff, K. D. (2015). Cultivating self-compassion in trauma survivors. In V. M. Follette, J. Briere, D. Rozelle, J. W. Hopper, & D. I. Rome (Eds.), Mindfulness-oriented interventions for trauma: Integrating contemplative practices. New York, NY, US: The Guilford Press.
  • Gilbert, P., Catarino, F., Duarte, C., Matos, M., Kolts, R., Stubbs, J., & Basran, J. (2017). The development of compassionate engagement and action scales for self and others. Journal of Compassionate Health Care, 4, 4.
  • Gilbert, P. (2017). Compassion: Concepts, Research and Application. New York: Routledge.
  • Hacker, T. (2008). The relational compassion scale: Development and validation of a new self-rated scale for the assessment of self-other compassion. (Doctoral dissertation) University of Glasgow.
  • Hölzel, B. K., Carmody, J., Vangel, M., Congleton, C., Yerramsetti, S. M., Gard, T., & Lazar, S. W. (2010). Mindfulness practice leads to increases in regional brain gray matter density. Psychiatry research, 191, 36–43.
  • Kemppainen, J.K., Brion, J.M., Leary, M., Wantland, D., Sullivan, K., Nokes, K., Bain, C.A., Chaiphibalsarisdi, P., Chen, W., Holzemer, W.L., Sanzero Eller, L., Iipinge, S., Johnson, M.O., Portillo, C., Voss, J., Tyer-Viola, L., Corless, I.B., & Nicholas, P.K. (2013). Use of a brief version of the self-compassion inventory with an international sample of people with HIV/AIDS. AIDS care, 25, 1513–1519.
  • Kraus, S., & Sears, S. (2009). Measuring the immeasurables: Development and initial validation of the Self-Other Four Immeasurables (SOFI) scale based on Buddhist teachings on loving kindness, compassion, joy, and equanimity. Social Indicators Research, 92, 169-181.
  • LeJeune, J. (2016). The Self-Compassion Scale, Short Form. retrieved from: https://www.actwithcompassion.com/january_2016_tool_of_the_month
  • Muris P, & Petrocchi N. (2017). Protection or vulnerability? A meta-analysis of the relations between the positive and negative components of self-compassion and psychopathology. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy; 24:373–383.
  • Neff, K. D. (2003a). Self-compassion: An alternative conceptualization of a healthy attitude toward oneself. Self and Identity, 2, 85-102.
  • Neff, K. D. (2003b). Development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion. Self and Identity, 2, 223-250.
  • Neff, K. D., & Vonk, R. (2009). Self-Compassion versus Global Self-Esteem: Two Different Ways of Relating to Oneself. Journal of Personality, 77, 23-50.
  • Neff, K. D., & Germer, C. K. (2013). A Pilot Study and Randomized Controlled Trial of the Mindful Self-Compassion Program. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 69, 28-44.
  • Neff, K. D. (2015). The Self-Compassion Scale is a Valid and Theoretically Coherent Measure of Self-Compassion. Mindfulness.
  • Neff, K. D. (2016). Does Self-Compassion Entail Reduced Self-Judgment, Isolation, and Over-Identification? A Response to Muris, Otgaar, and Petrocchi Mindfulness. Advance online publication.
  • Neff, K.D., Whittaker, T.A., & Karl, A. (2017). Examining the factor structure of the self-compassion scale in four distinct populations. Journal of personality assessment, 99, 596-607.
  • Neff, K. D. & Germer, C. (2017). Self-Compassion and Psychological Well-being. In Oxford Handbook of Compassion Science, Chap. 27. Oxford University Press.
  • Pfattheicher, S., Geiger, M., Hartung, J., Weiss, S., & Schindler, S. (2017). Old wine in new bottles? The case of self-compassion and neuroticism. Eur. J. Pers. 31, 160–169.
  • Raes, F., Pommier, E., Neff, K. D., & van Gucht, D. (2011). Construction and factorial validation of a Short Form of the Self-Compassion Scale. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 18, 250–255.
  • Roszkowski, M. J. & Soven, M. (2010). Shifting gears: consequences of including two negatively worded items in the middle of a positively worded questionnaire. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35, 117-134.
  • Strauss, C., Lever Taylor, B., Gu, J., Kuyken, W., & Baer, R., Jones, F. & Cavanagh, K. (2016). What is Compassion and How Can We Measure it? A Review of Definitions and Measures. Clinical Psychology Review. 47.
  • Thompson, L. Y., & Snyder, C. R. (2003). Measuring forgiveness. In Shane J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and measures (pp. 301-312). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.
  • Watson, D. C. (2018). Self-compassion, the ‘quiet ego’ and materialism. Heliyon, 4.
  • Wayment, H. A., Bauer, J. J., & Sylaska, K. (2015). The Quiet Ego Scale: Measuring the compassionate self-identity. Journal of Happiness Studies: An Interdisciplinary Forum on Subjective Well-Being, 16, 999-1033.
  • Williams, M. J., Dalgleish, T., Karl, A., & Kuyken, W. (2014). Examining the Factor Structures of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire and the Self-Compassion Scale. Psychological Assessment, 26, 407.
  • Zeng, X., Wei, J., Oei, T. P., & Lui, X. (2016). The Self-Compassion Scale is not validated in a Buddhist sample. Journal of Religion and Health, 1-14.


What our readers think

  1. richard bowen

    A Marvellous resource..welldone and thankyou….Thailand is top of the pops for self compassion…Taiwan is the lowest.
    have you got more detail on this so I can retire to somewhere harmonious..NOT the West!!

  2. Kristin Neff

    There is new information about the Self-Compassion Scale that can be added to this post. Neff et al., (2019) recently conducted the most comprehensive study of self-compassion ever undertaken, examining the factor structure of the SCS in 20 different international samples using 13 different translations, which included community, student, meditator and clinical samples. Support was found for use of a single SCS score (explaining 95% of the reliable variance in item responding!), six separate sub scale scores, but not two global positive and negative scores. Moreover, Ferrari et al.,, (2019) conducted a meta-analysis of 27 RCTs of self-compassion training and found that all six components of self-compassion changed as a result of changing. They also found effect sizes for reductions in psychopathology similar to those found in studies examining the correlations between the SCS and psychopathology, countering arguments that the SCS inflates the link between self-compassion and psychopathology. These articles can be found at self-compassion.org.

    • Husam

      Hello. How can I obtain the self-compassion scale for the scientist Neff 2019. Can you help me? Thanks

      • Nicole Celestine

        Hi Husam,
        I believe you can find the scale in Neff’s original article, which is available here.
        – Nicole | Community Manager


Let us know your thoughts

Your email address will not be published.


Read other articles by their category

3 Self-Compassion Tools (PDF)