Brazilian Psychosocial Risk Assessment (COPSOQ II-Br)COPSOQ II-Br
~6 min · 40 問 · 無料の簡易レポート
このテストにはセンシティブな内容が含まれています。結果はプライベートであり、明示的に同意しない限り雇用主と共有されることはありません。
Forty questions in Brazilian Portuguese about the working conditions you are actually exposed to — how much lands on you and how fast, the say you have, who backs you up, what is fair, and what the job is doing to your energy, your stress, and the rest of your life. The COPSOQ II-Br is the culturally adapted and validated Brazilian short version of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire, recognized by the international COPSOQ network — and the validated instrument cited in Brazil's debate on psychosocial risks at work under NR-1. It reads 23 dimensions of your work environment and places each one in the instrument's own published bands: safe, attention, or risk.
Not your personality — your working conditions, read by Brazil's validated instrument. Forty questions in Portuguese, twenty-three dimensions, each placed in the published safe, attention, or risk band.
- Map your perceived exposure across the 23 psychosocial dimensions of the validated Brazilian instrument — demands, pace, influence, meaning, leadership, support, justice, work-family conflict, burnout and stress symptoms — and see exactly which dimensions of your working conditions sit in the published safe, attention, or risk band.
登録不要で開始できます。簡易レポートは最後に無料で提供されます。 完全レポートは$9.90です。必要なときにお支払いください。
このテストで測定されるもの
量的要求
仕事のペース
感情的要求
仕事への影響力
発展の可能性
仕事の意味
職場へのコミットメント
予測可能性
承認
役割明確性
リーダーシップの質
ソーシャルサポート
仕事満足度
Work-Family Conflict
Trust in Management
Justice
General Health
バーンアウト症状
ストレス症状
Unwanted Sexual Attention
暴力の脅威
身体的暴力
いじめ
クリックからレポートまで。
手順はシンプルです：回答し、システムが計算し、結果が表示されます。事前登録不要、フォーム不要、待ち時間なし。
- 1
「無料で始める」をクリック
開始時に登録は不要です。結果を保存したいときに、最後に本人確認を行います。テストはすぐに始まります。
- 2
質問に答える
Likert scale with the questionnaire's own printed values (anchors vary by question: frequency, extent, satisfaction, one self-rated health question, and four yes/no exposure screenings)。進捗バーが表示されます。本人確認後は、どのデバイスからでも中断・再開可能です。
- 3
簡易レポートを受け取る
即座に無料で提供。各次元のテキスト要約と、高・中・低の指標が含まれます。
- 4
完全レポートが必要か決める
簡易レポートだけでも十分な価値があります。完全レポートには、パーセンタイル、基準比較、チャート、応用的推奨、検証可能な修了証が追加されます。
- 5
統合チャットで探求する
AIとあなたの結果について対話できます。プロフィールがキャリアにどう活かせるか、高いスコアの意味、他のテストとの比較などを尋ねられます。
簡易レポートはすぐにあなたのものに。完全レポートは必要に応じて。
| 無料版と有料版の比較 | 簡易レポート (常に無料) | 完全レポート ($9.90) |
|---|---|---|
| 回答に基づいて生成された各次元の解釈テキスト | ✓ | ✓ |
| 各次元の素点スコア | ✓ | ✓ |
| 1段落の概要 | ✓ | ✓ |
| 簡易レポートの全内容を、各次元3〜5段落に拡張 | — | ✓ |
| 各次元のパーセンタイル（基準群との比較） | — | ✓ |
| アクセシブルなデータテーブル付きの次元間チャート | — | ✓ |
| キャリア、人間関係、セルフケアへの応用的推奨 | — | ✓ |
| 公開検証とPDFダウンロード付き修了証 | — | ✓ |
- ✓簡易レポートの全内容を、各次元3〜5段落に拡張
- ✓各次元のパーセンタイル（基準群との比較）
- ✓キャリア、人間関係、セルフケアへの応用的推奨
- ✓公開検証とPDFダウンロード付き修了証
テスト完了後、簡易レポートの先に進みたい場合のみお支払いいただきます。
PIX（即時）またはクレジットカードでお支払い。レポートへのアクセスは1年間。その後、レポートは読み取り専用モードで閲覧可能です。
受け取れるもの。
パーセンタイル付きレーダーチャート。説明のための例示。
エグゼクティブサマリー
「あなたは高い知的好奇心と平均以上の誠実性を特徴とするプロフィールを示しており、中程度の外向性とバランスの取れた情緒反応性を持っています。この組み合わせは、規律を持って新しいことを求める人を示唆しています。」
説明のための例示。
尺度分析
完全レポートでは、各スコアの実際的な意味を3〜5段落で詳述し、あなたの総合的なプロフィールに基づいてパーソナライズされます。範囲ごとの一般的なテキストではなく、すべての次元を横断してあなたに特有の観察を生成する分析です。
応用的推奨
あなたの総合的なプロフィールに基づく分野別の実用的推奨（キャリア、人間関係、学業、セルフケア）。検証可能なQR付き修了証とPDFダウンロード。
このツールを信頼できる理由。
The COPSOQ II-Br (Gonçalves, Moriguchi, Chaves & Sato, 2021) is the culturally adapted, validated Brazilian short version of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire, recognized by the international COPSOQ network and cited in the context of Brazil's NR-1 on psychosocial risks. Forty questions cover 23 dimensions; each dimension is scored as the sum of its questions on the values printed on the official questionnaire and interpreted against the published safe/attention/risk ranges — the traffic-light scheme is the instrument's own. The four offensive-behaviour questions are yes/no exposure screenings by the instrument's design, outside the scoring scheme. The questionnaire exists only in Brazilian Portuguese: it IS the official national version, and the licence forbids self-made translations.
- 著者:
- Gonçalves, Moriguchi, Chaves & Sato
- 年:
- 2021
- デジタルオブジェクト識別子 — ジャーナル記事への直接リンク。:
- 10.11606/s1518-8787.2021055003123
- Gonçalves JS, Moriguchi CS, Chaves TC, Sato TO (2021). Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the short version of COPSOQ II-Brazil. Rev Saúde Pública, 55.
このテストの背景にある理論。
Psychosocial Work Factors
Framework holding that measurable characteristics of how work is organized — demands, control, support, rewards, predictability, justice, insecurity — shape workers' health, motivation, and performance. It integrates the major work environment theories rather than following one: demand-control-support (Karasek & Theorell), effort-reward imbalance (Siegrist), job demands-resources, work-family conflict, and workplace social capital. Exposure is a property of the work environment, measured as workers' perceptions of current conditions, dimension by dimension, not a trait of the person.
この理論について詳しく見る →ターゲット
Workers in Brazil who want a structured, validated reading of their own working conditions — and the HR, occupational health and safety professionals responsible for psychosocial risk assessment who want to experience the national instrument from the inside.
推奨年齢: 18+
レポートが答える質問。
Does the work fit in the time you are given?
Two questions read the mismatch between what lands on you and the time available — deliveries slipping, time that never suffices. Low is the published safe zone; a sum of 5 or more sits in the risk band, one of the classic precursors of exhaustion.
How fast does the work make you move?
Distinct from volume: pace is the speed demanded moment to moment — an accelerated rhythm, sustained across the whole shift. Energizing in bursts, corrosive as a permanent state; the published bands put a sustained high pace squarely in the risk zone.
How much feeling does your work put you through?
Some jobs process materials; others process people in difficult moments. This reads how often work places you in emotionally draining situations or hands you other people's problems. A high reading names a real occupational load — typical of care, teaching, and service work — not a weakness in the person carrying it.
How much say do you have over your own work?
Influence is the classic buffer of work psychology: the same demands weigh differently on people who can shape decisions and workload. Here the direction flips — a HIGH score is the safe band, and a low one, especially under high demands, is the textbook high-strain configuration.
Is the work building anything in you?
Whether the job lets you learn new things and demands initiative from you. High sits in the safe band: the work grows you as it uses you. A low score describes work that neither stretches nor draws on you — a strong predictor of the slow, undramatic kind of disengagement.
Does the work feel worth doing?
Two direct questions: is your work meaningful, and does what you do feel important. Meaning is one of the strongest sustaining forces a job can have — note that this dimension's published safe band starts higher than most (6 of 8), because on meaning, merely moderate is already worth attention.
Would you recommend this workplace to a friend?
How much your workplace matters to you, tested by the most honest question there is: would you tell a friend to apply? High commitment sits in the safe band. A low score often says less about your loyalty than about what the workplace has given you to be loyal to.
Do you find out in time, or find out the hard way?
Advance notice of important decisions and changes, plus all the information needed to work well. High predictability is the safe band: the organization keeps you oriented. Low means navigating by rumor — and uncertainty about one's own near future is a stressor even when the eventual news is good.
Is your work seen and valued by your superiors?
Recognition from superiors and fair treatment, read together. High sits in the safe band. A persistent low score is one of the most reliable sources of workplace resentment — not because people need applause, but because sustained invisible effort eventually reads as effort wasted.
Do you know exactly what your job is?
Clear objectives and knowing exactly what is expected of you. High clarity — the safe band here also starts high (6 of 8) — lets you spend energy on the work instead of on decoding it. Being measured against expectations nobody stated is its own quiet stressor.
Is your immediate superior good at the job of leading?
Concretely: does your immediate superior prioritize satisfaction and plan the work well. Leadership quality radiates through several other dimensions — predictability, recognition, justice — which is why a low reading here so often names the mechanism behind a generally bad climate.
When you need your superior, do they show up?
How often your immediate superior listens to your problems and actually helps. High support — safe from 6 of 8 — means difficulties escalate to solutions instead of accumulating. Low means you are effectively alone with problems your role does not equip you to absorb by yourself.
Taking it all together — how satisfied are you?
One global question, considering all aspects of your work. This dimension is the summary feeling the other dimensions feed, and its published interpretation has only two bands: satisfied readings are safe, dissatisfied ones are risk — there is no comfortable middle on overall satisfaction.
What does the job cost the rest of your life?
Whether work drains so much energy, and takes so much time, that your private life pays for it. This is the spillover reading: the job's true cost measured where it lands — evenings, family, recovery. It is often the first place a sustainable-looking job reveals that it is not.
Does trust flow between you and the people above you?
Both directions at once: can you trust the information that comes from your superiors, and do they trust employees to do their work well. High vertical trust — the safe band — is the quiet infrastructure of every honest workplace conversation; low means communication has become performance.
Are conflicts and workloads handled fairly?
Fair conflict resolution and fair distribution of work. Perceived injustice is among the most corrosive workplace exposures on record — people absorb heavy demands with surprising grace when the system feels fair, and modest ones poorly when it does not.
How is your health, in general?
One deliberately broad question, answered from excellent to poor — a measure with a long epidemiological record as a predictor of real health outcomes. In this profile it serves as context: the same working conditions land differently on different bodies. It reads your health, not what caused it.
How often have you felt physically and emotionally drained?
Frequency of physical and emotional exhaustion — the body's ledger of the demands the other dimensions describe. Note the strict published bands: feeling drained even 'sometimes' already leaves the safe zone. Exhaustion that has become routine deserves attention before it becomes identity.
How often have you been stressed and irritable?
Frequency of feeling stressed and irritated — the shorter-fuse counterpart of burnout. The bands here are equally strict: 'sometimes' is already the attention band. Persistent irritability is often the first symptom other people notice before the person under load does.
Were you exposed to unwanted sexual attention at work?
A screening question about the last 12 months, not a scale: the published instrument assigns it no score bands, and your report shows it as an exposure flag. Any 'yes' here names a serious workplace occurrence — the kind that calls for institutional response, not self-help.
Were you exposed to threats of violence at work?
A 12-month screening flag, outside the safe/attention/risk scheme by the instrument's own design. Threats are an occupational hazard in their own right — well documented as harmful even when never carried out — and a 'yes' is information for protection channels, not a score to improve.
Were you exposed to physical violence at work?
A 12-month screening flag, reported as exposed or not exposed. The instrument deliberately does not scale this: physical violence at work is not a matter of degree to be banded but an occurrence to be addressed — through the employer's protection duties and, where it applies, the law.
Were you exposed to bullying at work?
The questionnaire defines bullying precisely — repeated exposure to unpleasant or degrading treatment that is hard to defend against — and asks about the last 12 months. Reported as an exposure flag, not a score. Repetition is the defining feature: it separates bullying from an isolated bad day.
最も効果的な方。
A worker who wants to name what exactly the job is costing them
'O trabalho anda pesado' is a feeling, not a finding. Twenty-three named dimensions — load, pace, influence, recognition, justice, spillover into family life — show which two or three actually sit in the published risk band, and which conditions are quietly holding you up.
An HR or occupational safety professional preparing for NR-1 work
Before commissioning or running a psychosocial risk assessment, answer the national instrument yourself. Knowing how the questions feel from the inside — and what a safe/attention/risk profile looks like — changes how you plan the aggregate work later.
A manager who suspects the problem is how the work is designed
When good people keep wearing out in the same role, the role is a suspect. The demands, pace, influence, and predictability dimensions describe the job as its holder experiences it — which is not always the job the org chart describes.
よくある質問
What does this test have to do with Brazil's NR-1?
NR-1, Brazil's regulatory norm on occupational risk management, brought psychosocial risk factors into the risks every employer must identify and manage. The COPSOQ II-Br is the culturally adapted, validated Brazilian instrument cited in that context by the research group that validated it — a recognized member of the international COPSOQ network's family of national versions. To be precise about what that means: taking this test gives you (or your team) a validated reading of psychosocial factors; it does not by itself make any company compliant. Compliance is a management process — risk inventory, action plans, follow-up — that an instrument can inform but never replace.
Why is the questionnaire only available in Portuguese?
Because this instrument IS the Brazilian national version. The COPSOQ network licenses its questionnaires on the condition that only official, validated national versions are used, verbatim — self-made translations are not permitted. The COPSOQ II-Br exists in exactly one language, Brazilian Portuguese, so the questionnaire is offered in exactly one language. This page is readable in six languages, but the questions themselves are served only in Portuguese. If you want the same family of measurement in English or Spanish, that is our separate COPSOQ III test, the international version.
Is this a diagnosis of me or of my workplace — and who sees my answers?
Neither a diagnosis of you nor a verdict on your employer. Psychosocial exposure is measured as your perception of your current working conditions, dimension by dimension — one honest reading of the room. Your individual result is yours: taken on your own account, it is not shared with any employer. When organizations run assessments through NOESIS, they see aggregated readings, never an individual's answers — and the COPSOQ tradition itself requires anonymity in workplace applications. One person's profile locates what deserves attention; several colleagues' independent answers pointing at the same dimensions is where an organizational risk assessment begins.
What do the safe, attention, and risk bands mean?
They are the instrument's own published interpretation, not a NOESIS invention. For 19 of the 23 dimensions, the Brazilian research group published exact score ranges in three categories: safe (a situation favorable to health in that dimension), attention (neither good nor bad — it asks to be watched), and risk (an unfavorable situation with risk to health). The direction adapts to what the dimension measures: on Quantitative Demands a LOW score is safe; on Influence at Work a HIGH score is safe. The traffic-light colors — green, yellow, red — are also the instrument's own scheme.
Why is this test paid if the COPSOQ questionnaire is free?
The COPSOQ licence says, verbatim, that 'no fee can be charged for the use of the questionnaire per se, but fees for assessment, advice, analysis, training etc. are allowed' — and we honor both halves. The questionnaire's 40 questions are free knowledge: they are published in an open-access doctoral thesis, and nothing stops you from reading them there. What this test charges for is the NOESIS service around them: the structured application, the scoring against the published bands, the dimension-by-dimension report, and the platform that holds your results. That is exactly the kind of fee the licence explicitly allows.
How are the four offensive-behaviour questions treated?
Questions 20 to 23 ask about exposure to unwanted sexual attention, threats of violence, physical violence, and bullying in the last 12 months. The published instrument treats them differently from everything else: they carry no printed score values and no safe/attention/risk bands — the validation study handled them as yes/no screening answers. We keep that honesty: your report shows each of the four as an exposure flag (exposed or not exposed in the last 12 months), never as a score on a scale. One printed sub-question — 'if yes, from whom?' — is not supported by our questionnaire engine and is omitted; it does not affect any result, since the source itself does not score it.
より充実したプロフィールのために、ツールを組み合わせましょう。
各テストは異なる次元を測定します。統合チャットは完了したすべてのテストの結果を横断し、単一のツールでは見えないつながりを明らかにします。
Career Futures Profile
Twenty-eight items measuring career adaptability, optimism, and market knowledge.
無料で始める →Career Anchors Profile
Forty items mapping eight career anchors — the values you would not sacrifice.
無料で始める →Portrait Values Assessment
Ten basic human values mapped through 21 portrait descriptions, scored ipsatively.
無料で始める →Career Decision Difficulties Assessment
Ten specific barriers to career decision-making across three clusters.
無料で始める →このテストは情報提供を目的とした自己理解のためのツールです。心理学的または臨床的な診断を構成するものではなく、資格を持つ専門家による評価に代わるものでもありません。レポートにはテキスト生成に使用されたAIモデルが示されます。
The COPSOQ II-Br is the official Brazilian short version of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire, adapted and validated by the UFSCar group (Gonçalves, Moriguchi, Chaves & Sato, 2021) and recognized by the COPSOQ International Network. It is used here under the network's regime (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 with the network's own conditions): no fee is charged for the questionnaire itself — the price of this test covers the NOESIS service around it (application, scoring, and report); the validated version is reproduced intact and verbatim, without modification or translation. Terms specific to the Brazilian version beyond the network's regime have not been confirmed in writing with the LAFIPE-UFSCar group.