Measures

Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale

A global self-worth scale, rather than a measure of skill or objective achievement.

Questionnaire The format describes how observations are obtained, not an evidence rating.

What it measures

A person’s overall evaluation of their own worth.

What people do

The standard form is a ten-item self-report inventory with five positively worded and five negatively worded statements, typically rated on a 4-point agreement scale from Strongly agree to Strongly disagree. Choose a documented coding convention before scoring.

What the scores mean

After reverse-scoring the five negatively worded items, responses are commonly summed across the ten items for a 0 to 30 total (when coded 0 to 3) or a 10 to 40 total (when coded 1 to 4); Rosenberg’s 1965 book also described Guttman-scale scoring. Keep the coding direction and range explicit because different conventions shift the numerical range without changing the underlying answers.

This explains the logic of a score. It does not supply a test form, individual result or administration manual.

Development and versions

Morris Rosenberg developed the scale in adolescent research published in 1965. The University of Maryland Department of Sociology maintains the historical scale notice and public-domain statement.

Reliability and validity evidence

The inspected reference materials establish the 10-item structure, scoring conventions and availability, not a fresh psychometric validation. Reliability and validity for a particular age, language and purpose require the relevant validation study.

Evidence belongs to a version, sample and interpretation. Read the source notes for what was actually inspected.

Where it is used

Research on global self-evaluation and its associations. Low reported self-worth is not itself a psychiatric diagnosis.

Limits and common misreadings

  • Self-worth is different from narcissism or domain-specific confidence.
  • Negatively phrased items can add wording effects.
  • A convenient internet cutoff is not an established diagnosis.

Read an example

Original teaching example

Two fictional students feel equally capable at mathematics but evaluate their overall worth differently. A self-esteem score and a mathematics grade answer different questions; neither is a substitute for the other.

Constructed for learning; this is not a result from the instrument’s validation study.

Access and permission

Maryland’s current notice places the scale in the public domain, with scholarly attribution. Availability does not remove the need for validated adaptations.

Read the source for Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale

Textbook connection

Related contextPsychology 2e: 11.9 Personality Assessment

Conceptual context; the instrument-specific sources in this profile provide the primary evidence.

Related measures

Sources and inspection notes

Checked October 22, 2026. An inspection date is not a publication date. Publisher information is not presented as independent validation; abstract-only and indexed-excerpt access are identified below.

  1. Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W. J., & Lovett, M. D. (2020). Psychology 2e. OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/11-9-personality-assessmentTextbook: conceptual context

    Conceptual context; the instrument-specific sources in this profile provide the primary evidence.

  2. University of maryland: Rosenberg self esteem scale. (n.d.). https://socy.umd.edu/about-us/rosenberg-self-esteem-scaleInstitutional custodian: overview and public-domain notice

    The institutional description and public-domain notice were inspected (an earlier check encountered a temporary 502 before succeeding on recheck). This does not constitute inspection of the original 1965 validation data.

  3. University of maryland: Using the rosenberg self-esteem scale. (n.d.). https://socy.umd.edu/about-us/using-rosenberg-self-esteem-scaleInstitutional custodian: scoring instructions and 1965 reference list

    Official University of Maryland sociology guidance documenting the 10-item 4-point scale, five reverse-scored items (3, 5, 8, 9, 10), 0–30 and 10–40 sum conventions, and the 1965 book reference. Original 1965 validation tables were not directly inspected.