Vocational Interest Profile (ORVIS)ORVIS
~19 min · 92 questions · Free partial report
A 92-item profile of the kind of work that pulls at you, across eight interest scales: Leadership, Organization, Altruism, Creativity, Analysis, Production, Adventure and Erudition. Interest is not ability. This asks what you would be drawn to spend a working day doing, which is a different question from what you happen to be good at, and usually a steadier one. Your scores are placed against a community sample of 665 adults, so a high score means high compared to other people rather than high compared to your own other interests.
- See which kinds of work attract you and which leave you flat, and read the shape of the whole profile rather than any single scale. A profile with one clear peak points somewhere different from a profile that is even across the board, and both are useful to know before choosing a direction.
No signup required to start. The Partial Report is free at the end. The Complete costs $14.90, if and when you want it.
What this test measures
Leadership
Organization
Altruism
Creativity
Analysis
Production
Adventure
Erudition
Discover where you stand on each dimension.
Start for free →No prior signup. Free partial result immediately.
From first click to report.
The process is simple: you respond, the system calculates, and the result appears. No prior signup, no form, no waiting.
- 1
Click "Start for free"
No signup required to start. You identify yourself at the end, when you want to save the result. The test opens immediately.
- 2
Answer the questions
Likert 5-point scale (Strongly dislike to Strongly like). Visible progress bar. You can pause and resume from any device after identifying yourself.
- 3
Get the Partial Report
Immediate and free. A text summary of each dimension, with indication of high, medium, or low.
- 4
Decide if you want the Complete
The Partial already delivers value. The Complete adds percentiles, norm comparison, charts, applied recommendations, and a verifiable Certificate.
- 5
Explore in the Integrative Chat
Talk to an AI about your results. Ask how your profile applies to your career, what a high score means, or compare with other tests.
The Partial is yours right away. The Complete, when it makes sense.
| Free and paid, side by side | Partial Report (free, always) | Complete Report ($14.90) |
|---|---|---|
| Interpretive text per dimension, generated from your answers | ✓ | ✓ |
| Raw score for each dimension | ✓ | ✓ |
| One-paragraph overview reading | ✓ | ✓ |
| Everything in the Partial, expanded to 3–5 paragraphs per dimension | — | ✓ |
| Percentile per dimension, compared to reference norms | — | ✓ |
| Inter-dimensional chart with accessible data table | — | ✓ |
| Applied recommendations: career, relationships, self-care | — | ✓ |
| Certificate with public verification and PDF download | — | ✓ |
- ✓Everything in the Partial, expanded to 3–5 paragraphs per dimension
- ✓Percentile per dimension, compared to reference norms
- ✓Applied recommendations: career, relationships, self-care
- ✓Certificate with public verification and PDF download
You only pay after completing the test, if you want to go beyond the Partial.
- ✓Interpretive text per dimension, generated from your answers
- ✓Raw score for each dimension
- ✓One-paragraph overview reading
- ✓Free trial of the Integrative Chat, unlocked by your first test
Payment via PIX (instant) or credit card. Access for 1 year. After that, the report stays visible in read-only mode.
What you receive.
Radar chart with percentiles. Illustrative example.
Executive Summary
"You present a profile marked by high intellectual curiosity and above-average conscientiousness, with moderate extraversion and balanced emotional reactivity. This combination suggests someone who seeks novelty in a disciplined way."
Illustrative example.
Scale analysis
The Complete Report details the practical meaning of each score in 3 to 5 paragraphs, personalized by your combined profile. It is not a generic text by range; the analysis crosses all dimensions to generate specific observations about you.
Applied recommendations
Practical recommendations by area (career, relationships, studies, self-care), based on your combined profile. Certificate with verifiable QR and PDF download.
Why trust this instrument.
- Authors:
- Pozzebon, Visser, Ashton, Lee & Goldberg
- Year:
- 2010
- Range
- α 0.79 – 0.90(8 scales)
- Average
- α 0.85(good)
Cronbach's alpha. Values above .70 are acceptable; above .80, good.
- Pozzebon, J. A., Visser, B. A., Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., & Goldberg, L. R. (2010). Psychometric characteristics of a public-domain self-report measure of vocational interests: The Oregon Vocational Interest Scales. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92(2), 168-174.
The theory behind this test.
Vocational Interests
Framework treating occupational preference as a stable dispositional trait rather than a skill: what a person is drawn to doing is measurable, consistent over time, and distinct from what they are able to do. Holland's RIASEC typology is the field's reference structure; the ORVIS operationalises the same territory over eight scales derived empirically rather than from the hexagon.
Learn more about this theory →Target Audience
Adults choosing a first direction, considering a change, or trying to name why a job that looks right on paper still does not fit.
Questions the report answers.
Do you want the decision, or just a say in it?
Leadership here is appetite for being the one who decides and persuades, not skill at it. A high score describes someone who reaches for the room rather than waiting to be handed it. A low score is not passivity: plenty of people want real influence over the work and no interest at all in owning the outcome in public.
Does an ordered system feel like relief or like a cage?
This is interest in budgets, schedules, records and the machinery that keeps an operation from drifting. High scorers tend to find genuine satisfaction in a system that holds, which is a different thing from tidiness as a personal habit. Low scorers are not disorganised; they simply get nothing back from maintaining the structure itself.
Is the person in front of you the point, or the setting?
Altruism measures pull toward work whose result is another person being better off: teaching, care, counselling, service. A high score often shows up long before a career does. A low score says nothing about whether you are kind, only that helping is not what you want the working day to consist of.
Do you need to be the one who makes the thing?
This covers writing, performing, design and art as activities rather than as tastes. Enjoying music and wanting to play it professionally are different answers, and this scale asks the second. A high score in someone whose work has no making in it usually explains a restlessness they had put down to something else.
Is an unsolved problem an irritation or an invitation?
Analysis is appetite for the sciences, mathematics, and problems that hold still long enough to be taken apart. High scorers tend to want the mechanism, not just the outcome. A low score is common in people who are entirely capable of the work and would simply rather be doing something else with the day.
Do you want the day to end with something you can point at?
This is interest in growing, building, repairing and working with tools, land and animals. It is the most physical of the eight and the one most often left out of the conversation entirely. A high score alongside desk work is worth taking seriously; it rarely goes away on its own.
Does risk sharpen you or drain you?
Adventure covers competition, physical challenge and work with real stakes attached. A high score is not recklessness: it describes someone who is more present when something is on the line. A low score describes a preference for conditions where attention can go to the work instead of the danger.
Do words and languages feel like tools or like territory?
Erudition is pull toward reading, writing, languages and the handling of ideas in words. It sits close to Analysis and is not the same: one wants the mechanism, the other wants the expression. A high score with a low Analysis score points somewhere quite specific, and vice versa.
Who benefits most.
Someone a year from finishing a degree
The subject was chosen at seventeen, and the question of whether it still fits has been getting louder. A profile will not undo the degree, but it will say which parts of the field to walk toward.
Someone good at a job they have stopped wanting
Competence kept the promotions coming and quietly settled the direction. Naming the interests that the work never touched is usually the first step in working out what a change would need to include.
Someone choosing between two offers that both look fine
Salary and title are close enough that neither decides it. The profile turns the question from which job is better into which job asks for more of what you actually want to do.
Frequently asked questions
Will this tell me what job to take?
No, and be wary of anything that says it will. This measures what you are drawn to, not what you would be good at, what pays, or what is hiring. It narrows the field and gives you language for a preference you may already feel without being able to name it. The choice stays yours.
What is the difference between interest and ability?
You can be good at something you find dull, and drawn to something you have never tried. Interest predicts what you will still want to be doing in five years; ability predicts how well you will do it next week. They are separate measurements and this one is about interest. Nothing here says anything about your competence.
Why are my scores compared to other people?
Because almost everyone says they somewhat like most things. Comparing your raw answers to each other would mostly measure how enthusiastic you are in general. Placing them against a community sample of 665 adults separates the interests that are genuinely strong for you from the ones that merely sound agreeable.
Is this the same as a Holland or RIASEC code?
It covers the same territory with a different map. RIASEC organises interests into six types arranged in a hexagon; these eight scales were drawn from how people's answers actually group together. Expect the two to agree in broad strokes and differ in detail.
What if my profile is flat?
A flat profile is an answer, not a failure of the test. It usually means either that your interests are genuinely broad, which widens the field rather than narrowing it, or that you answered about what you should like rather than what you do like. If it is the second, the items are worth a second pass.
Combine instruments for a fuller profile.
Each test measures different dimensions. The Integrative Chat crosses the results of all tests you complete, revealing connections no single instrument can show.
Transformational Leadership Assessment
~9 min·28 questions
Which of seven leadership behaviors do you actually use, and which do you only intend to? 28 statements, honestly self-scored.
Start for free →Career Interest Profiler (O*NET Mini-IP)
~5 min·30 questions
The U.S. Department of Labor's 30-item interest profiler: rate real work activities, get your Holland (RIASEC) code.
Start for free →Brazilian Psychosocial Risk Assessment (COPSOQ II-Br)
~6 min·40 questions
The validated Brazilian instrument for psychosocial risks at work — 23 dimensions, each read against published safe/attention/risk bands.
Start for free →Psychosocial Work Environment (COPSOQ III)
~9 min·60 questions
The international reference questionnaire on psychosocial working conditions — 26 dimensions of your work environment, one 0-100 reading each.
Start for free →Vocational Interest Profile (ORVIS)
No signup, no time limit. The Partial is free at the end.
The Complete costs $14.90, if and when you want it.
This test is a self-knowledge tool for informational purposes. It does not constitute a psychological or clinical diagnosis and does not replace evaluation by a qualified professional. The report indicates the AI model used in text generation.
This test uses the Oregon Vocational Interest Scales from the International Personality Item Pool (IPIP), which is in the public domain. The scales were developed by Pozzebon, Visser, Ashton, Lee and Goldberg (2010).