The Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ) is a 16-item self-report measure of trait worry in adults (Meyer et al., 1990). Rather than asking about specific worry topics or physical anxiety symptoms, the PSWQ focuses on the worry process itself, that is, how excessive, uncontrollable, and pervasive worry tends to be for that individual.
Worry is a common human experience, but for some individuals it becomes excessive, difficult to control, and pervasive across multiple areas of life. This kind of pathological worry — defined as worry that is excessive in intensity or frequency and difficult to control (Liu, Nijmeh & Warren, 2022) — is a central feature of generalised anxiety disorder (GAD), and is also present across a range of other anxiety and mood disorders, including social anxiety disorder (SAD). Excessive worry is also associated with psychological distress and functional impairment (Liu et al., 2022). The PSWQ was developed to capture this worry process, assessing how excessive, uncontrollable, and pervasive worry tends to be for an individual, rather than asking about specific worry topics or physical symptoms of anxiety (Meyer et al., 1990).
The PSWQ has been widely used in clinical practice and research. It can be used to quantify the presence and severity of pathological worry, monitor changes in worry over time, and evaluate treatment effectiveness (Meyer et al., 1990; Fisher, 2006). It is appropriate for use across a range of clinical contexts where worry is a relevant presenting concern, including anxiety disorders, mood disorders, and other conditions where worry plays a transdiagnostic role (McEvoy et al., 2013).
Respondents rate 11 positively worded items and five negatively worded items (reverse-scored) in terms of how typical or characteristic each statement is of them on a 5-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 (Not at all typical) to 5 (Very typical)). The PSWQ total score ranges from 16 to 80, with higher scores representing greater worry severity.
The total PSWQ score is expressed as a percentile based on three reference populations: a non-clinical sample (Gillis et al., 1995), a Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD) sample (Fresco et al., 2003), and a pooled Generalised Anxiety Disorder (GAD) sample (Behar et al., 2003; Fresco et al., 2003). Comparing scores across all three populations provides richer clinical information than any single comparison, helping clinicians understand not only whether worry is elevated relative to the general population, but also how it compares to individuals with known anxiety presentations.
On first administration, a horizontal bar graph displays the respondent’s total PSWQ score (shown in red) alongside the score distributions of three reference populations: a non-clinical sample (green), individuals diagnosed with SAD (blue), and individuals diagnosed with GAD (purple). The shaded regions for each population represent the middle 50% of scores (from the 25th to 75th percentile), with the dashed line indicating the 50th percentile (median). This allows clinicians to see at a glance where a respondent’s worry level falls relative to both the general population and clinical groups.
When administered more than once, a line graph tracks the respondent’s total PSWQ score across administrations. The background shading transitions from white (low worry) through yellow to red (high worry), providing a visual indicator of worry severity. Each data point is labelled with the score and administration date, allowing clinicians to quickly identify the direction and magnitude of change over time.
The PSWQ demonstrates excellent reliability, with Cronbach’s α typically ranging from 0.91–0.95 in non-clinical samples (Meyer et al., 1990; Davey, 1993) and 0.86–0.93 in clinical samples (Brown et al., 1992).
Test-retest reliability confirms the score stability expected of a trait measure. Meyer et al. (1990) reported (2-week correlations of r = 0.75 and longer-interval stability (4-week r = 0.74 and r = 0.93; 8–10 week r = 0.92). Schroder et al. (2019) reported 1-month stability of r = 0.77 and 1-year stability of r = 0.81 (n = 34). High temporal stability is consistent with the PSWQ functioning as a trait measure, suggesting that substantial score changes are less likely to reflect random measurement fluctuation.
Factor analyses consistently support a dominant general worry factor underlying the PSWQ (Meyer et al., 1990; Lui et al., 2022; Bottesi & Spoto, 2025). It was designed to assess the process of worry itself (excessiveness, generality, and uncontrollability) rather than the specific content of the worry.
Research has found that individuals with GAD score significantly higher on the PSWQ than individuals with other anxiety disorders (Brown et al., 1992) and non-clinical samples (Meyer et al., 1990; Davey et al., 1993), confirming its sensitivity to the pervasive worry that characterises GAD (American Psychiatric Association, 2022; Borkovec et al., 1991). The PSWQ also demonstrates strong convergent validity with other measures of worry and anxiety (Meyer et al., 1990; Molina & Borkovec, 1994).
PSWQ scores are interpreted through percentile comparisons to three reference populations: a non-clinical sample (n = 244; M = 42.2, SD = 11.5; Gillis et al., 1995), a Social Anxiety Disorder sample (n = 114; M = 56.35, SD = 14.84; Fresco et al., 2003), and a pooled Generalised Anxiety Disorder sample (n = 187; M = 67.45, SD = 7.99; Behar et al., 2003; Fresco et al., 2003). Percentiles are calculated using the cumulative normal distribution function applied to z-scores derived from each sample’s parameters. Comparing a client’s score across all three populations can provide a richer clinical context for interpreting PSWQ scores than any single comparison.
Means and standard deviations for three samples are shown below, and can be used to compute percentiles.
1 – An adult community sample (n = 244) established typical scores in the normal population (Gillis, Haaga, & Ford, 1995).
Age 18-44: M = 43.5, SD = 12.1
Age 45-65: M = 38.9, SD = 9.0
2 – A social anxiety disorder sample established typical scores with those with social anxiety (n = 132).
Mean 56.2 and SD = 14.8
3 – A GAD sample established typical scores in people diagnosed with generalised anxiety disorder (n = 28), (Turk, Fresco, Mennin & Heimberg (2001).
Mean = 68.1 and SD = 7.3
The same score can mean very different things depending on the comparison group — for example, a score of 62 falls at the 96th percentile relative to the non-clinical but only the 20th percentile relative to individuals with GAD. Comparing across non-clinical, Social Anxiety Disorder, and GAD populations simultaneously provides a more nuanced interpretation of where a respondent’s worry level falls and supports informed clinical judgment.
There is no single recommended interval, and frequency should be guided by clinical context. Because the PSWQ measures worry as a stable trait rather than day-to-day fluctuations (Meyer et al., 1990; Schroder et al., 2020), administering it too frequently is unlikely to capture genuine change. Regardless of interval, a change of 6 or more points is needed to conclude that a meaningful shift has occurred (Gillis et al., 1995; Norman et al., 2003), as smaller changes are likely to reflect normal variation rather than due to clinical intervention.
No. The PSWQ was developed and validated for use with adults, and the normative data used in NovoPsych is based on adult samples (Gillis et al., 1995). It is not appropriate for use with individuals under 18. NovoPsych includes several validated measures for assessing anxiety in children and adolescents, including the RCADS-Child, SCAS, and PAS, which are available in both child self-report and parent-report versions.
Severity labels like “mild,” “moderate,” or “severe” are widely used in clinical practice but have no published research backing their specific score ranges on the PSWQ. Similarly, while some cutoff scores appear in the research literature, they were developed for study recruitment purposes rather than clinical use, and therefore likely do not translate well to real-world settings.
Rather than applying unvalidated labels or thresholds, NovoPsych uses percentile comparisons to well-characterised reference populations as the primary interpretive framework. Where cutoff scores are referenced in the report, they are provided for context only and should be interpreted with caution alongside a comprehensive clinical assessment.
The GAD-7 assesses symptoms of Generalised Anxiety Disorder over the past two weeks, including somatic symptoms like restlessness and muscle tension. The PSWQ specifically measures the trait of worry itself (i.e., how excessive, pervasive, and uncontrollable it is) without specifying a defined time period. The PSWQ is better suited to assessing worry as a stable characteristic, while the GAD-7 captures a broader range of anxiety symptoms over a specific period.
The two measures can be used together in a complementary way. The GAD-7 helps track current symptom severity and response to treatment, while the PSWQ helps clarify whether a client has a longstanding tendency toward excessive worry that may warrant targeted intervention. Used together, they can provide both a state-based and trait-based understanding of anxiety.
Meyer, T. J., Miller, M. L., Metzger, R. L., & Borkovec, T. D. (1990). Development and validation of the penn state worry questionnaire. Behavior Research and Therapy, 28, 487-495.
American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed., text rev.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787
Behar, E., Alcaine, O., Zuellig, A. R., & Borkovec, T. D. (2003). Screening for generalized anxiety disorder using the Penn State Worry Questionnaire: A receiver operating characteristic analysis. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 34(1), 25-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7916(03)00004-1
Borkovec, T. D., Shadick, R. N., & Hopkins, M. (1991). The nature of normal and pathological worry. In R. M. Rapee & D. H. Barlow (Eds.), Chronic anxiety: Generalized anxiety disorder and mixed anxiety-depression (pp. 29–51). Guilford Press.
Bottesi, G., & Spoto, A. (2025). Should we worry about how we measure worry? Insights from an updated version of the Italian Penn State Worry Questionnaire. Journal of Affective Disorders, 369, 283–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2025.100579
Brown, T. A., Antony, M. M., & Barlow, D. H. (1992). Psychometric properties of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire in a clinical anxiety disorders sample. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 30(1), 33-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(92)90093-V
Chorpita, B. F., Tracey, S. A., Brown, T. A., Collica, T. J., & Barlow, D. H. (1997). Assessment of worry in children and adolescents: An adaptation of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 35(6), 569–581. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0005-7967(96)00116-7
Davey, G. C. L. (1993). A comparison of three worry questionnaires. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 31(1), 51–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(93)90042-S
Fresco, D. M., Mennin, D. S., Heimberg, R. G., & Turk, C. L. (2003). Using the Penn State Worry Questionnaire to identify individuals with generalized anxiety disorder: A receiver operating characteristic analysis. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 34(3-4), 283-291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2003.09.001
Gillis, M. M., Haaga, D. A. F., & Ford, G. T. (1995). Normative values for the Beck Anxiety Inventory, Fear Questionnaire, Penn State Worry Questionnaire, and Social Phobia and Anxiety Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 7(4), 450-455. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.7.4.450
Liu, K., Nijmeh, J. S., & Warren, S. L. (2022). Factor structure, measurement invariance, and concurrent validity of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire across development, psychopathology, and culture. Assessment, 29(5), 909–924. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191121993223
Meyer, T. J., Miller, M. L., Metzger, R. L., & Borkovec, T. D. (1990). Development and validation of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 28(6), 487-495. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(90)90135-6
Molina, S., & Borkovec, T. D. (1994). The Penn State Worry Questionnaire: Psychometric properties and associated characteristics. In G. C. L. Davey & F. Tallis (Eds.), Worrying: Perspectives on theory, assessment and treatment (pp. 265–283). John Wiley & Sons.
Norman, G. R., Sloan, J. A., & Wyrwich, K. W. (2003). Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: The remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Medical Care, 41(5), 582–592. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.MLR.0000062554.74615.4C
Schroder, H. S., Clark, D. A., & Moser, J. S. (2019). Screening for problematic worry in adults with a single item from the Penn State Worry Questionnaire. Assessment, 26(2), 336-346. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191117694453
Stöber, J. (1998). Reliability and validity of two widely-used worry questionnaires: Self-report and self-peer convergence. Personality and Individual Differences, 24(6), 887-890. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(97)00232-8
