Development and Psychometric Properties of the Existential Anxiety Questionnaire

Jessica Ross, B.S., Monica Oh, B.S., Malindi Gowen, M.S., & Jacob Marszalek, Ph.D.
University of MissouriKansas City

Table 1. Existential Anxiety Item Stems, Coefficients, and Communalities (N = 92)

Table 2. Descriptive Statistics for Items of the Existential Anxiety Questionnaire (N = 92)
Item Factor 1ab Factor 2ab Factor 3ab h2
The current study re-developed the Existential Anxiety Questionnaire (Weems et al., 2004) Factor 1: Guilt and Condemnation Item Min. Max. M SD Skewness Statistica Kurtosis Statisticb
as a response to a call by the authors to increase items and extend beyond the true/false 1) I am not anxious about my fate. .47 -.04 .23 .34
dichotomy of the previous instrument. To answer this call, the current study produced a 22- 1 1.00 5.00 3.50 1.35 -.57 -.96
2) I believe that my life has meaning. .47 .27 .09 .48
item measure of existential anxiety which utilized a 5 point Likert-type scale. An exploratory
factor analysis of these items produced three factors that align with Tillichs theorized 3) I feel like I have control over my life and what happens in it. .59 -.07 .30 .54 2 1.00 5.00 2.17 1.12 .91 .30
domains. Convergent and discriminant validity of the measure was established through 4) I do not feel guilt, because I believe I am a good person. .64 .04 -.24 .36
correlational analysis between responses to the existential anxiety measure and measures 3 1.00 5.00 2.89 1.23 .10 -.97
5) I feel like I know the role I play in the world. .84 -.11 -.13 .57
of purpose, pathological anxiety, depression, and identity distressall correlations were
significant and in the expected direction. An in-depth analysis of these items indicated that 6) I feel as if I act in accordance with what I believe is right and 4 1.00 5.00 1.59 .95 1.63 1.90
.37 .24 -.10 .23
this measure, while an adequate measure of the existential anxiety construct, may serve wrong.
different assessment purposes than the original Existential Anxiety Questionnaire as 7) I do not have anxiety about meaning in my life, because I have a 5 1.00 5.00 1.58 .98 1.82 2.79
.70 .19 -.05 .61
lot of hope for my future.
developed by Weems et al. (2004).
8) I do not feel anxiety about my morals. .70 -.04 -.01 .46 6 1.00 5.00 3.22 1.30 -.17 -1.13
Factor 2: Emptiness and Meaninglessness
7 1.00 5.00 3.16 1.20 -.25 -.78
Existential anxiety, as defined by Tillich (1952), is an anxiety about the meaning of life and 1) I often feel anxious because I feel that people are judging me.
.04 .48 .07 .29
death, specifically concerning threats of ontical, spiritual, and moral self-affirmation. 8 1.00 5.00 2.11 1.27 1.01 .02
Such threats manifest as anxiety in three domains: Fate and Death, Emptiness and 2) My life feels empty and this causes me anxiety. .05 .67 .03 .51
Meaninglessness, and Guilt and Condemnation (Tillich, 1952). 3) I believe there is no meaning to my existence. -.16 .59 .09 .33 9 1.00 5.00 1.27 .78 3.28 10.56
Existential anxiety is highly prevalent and likely a normative phenomenon (Weems, Costa, 4) I have no major goals for my life and this makes me anxious. .12 .41 .14 .31
Dehon, & Berman, 2004). 10 1.00 5.00 2.20 .89 .64 .29
The existing Existential Anxiety Questionnaire has been utilized efficiently with clients at 5) I despise myself because of my lack of ethics. .06 .73 -.17 .49
different stages of the lifespan and has reached adequate reliability and validity estimates 6) I have doubts about the significance of my belief system, and 11 1.00 5.00 1.90 1.08 1.32 1.27
-.12 .52 .10 .27
(Berman, Weems, & Stickle, 2006; Weems et al., 2004). this causes me anxiety.
However, when considering the degree of complexity of existential anxiety as a construct, 7) I feel condemned because I do not live up to the ethical 12 1.00 5.00 2.14 1.26 .93 -.17
.09 .60 -.10 .37
a measure that extends beyond the true/false dichotomy in response options may give standards set by society.
additional information about the experience of existential anxiety and its prevalence. 8) I am worried that my life might have no meaning. .25 .31 .25 .41 13 1.00 4.00 1.18 .51 3.37 12.64
Weems et al. (2004) have called for an improvement to their existing measure by adding a Factor 3: Fate and Death
14 1.00 5.00 1.42 .83 2.17 4.56
Likert-type rating and additional questionnaire items. 1) I am anxious about death because I do not know how or when it
-.17 .15 .69 .50
Though additional studies have proceeded in studying existential anxiety as a construct, will happen. 15 1.00 5.00 2.62 1.31 .26 -1.19
up to this point there are no known studies that have answered this call to improve the 2) I feel anxious when I think about fate. .13 .12 .59 .52
measure and report the psychometric data. 3) The thought of not existing gives me anxiety. 16 1.00 5.00 2.52 1.33 .40 -1.07
-.09 -.15 .89 .65
Method 4) I often think about death and this causes me anxiety. -.16 .20 .85 .80 17 1.00 5.00 1.40 .84 2.31 5.10
Participants: 5) I am not anxious about death, because I am prepared for
92 individuals self-selected for inclusion in the online survey, distributed through social .44 -.30 .50 .46
whatever it may bring. 18 1.00 5.00 1.69 1.18 1.62 1.39
media and a University Undergraduate Psychology Participation Pool. These participants Note: The response scale for these items was: 1 = Untrue of Me; 2 = Somewhat True of Me; 3 = True of Me; 4 = Very True of Me; 5 =
Always True of Me
(Mage = 27) self-identified in the following demographic categories: 61% female, 38% a. Items were extracted according to principal axis factoring with promax rotation.
19 1.00 5.00 1.82 1.11 1.41 1.30
male, 1% Trans+. 68% Caucasian, 14% Asian/Pacific Islander, 11% Black/African American, b. Pattern coefficients are followed by structure coefficients in parentheses.
5% Latino/a, 2% Other. 32% identified religion as not at all important in everyday life, c. Factor correlations were as follows: r12 =.47, r13= .43, r23= .45 20 1.00 5.00 3.37 1.39 -.34 -1.15
while 24% identified religion as very much important in every day life. 89% identified as
heterosexual.
Results 21 1.00 5.00 2.36 1.25 .40 -1.04
The EAQ was hypothesized to measure three domains (i.e., Fate and Death, Emptiness and a. SE = 0.25
Measures: Meaninglessness, Guilt and Condemnation) in a hierarchical model, consistent with theory. Evidence for
b. SE = 0.50
this structure was provided by principal axis factoring (PAF) using a promax rotation. Appropriateness of
Existential Anxiety Questionnaire: 39 items were created by the authors, some of which
the data for the EAQ was assessed using the inter-item correlation matrix, which indicated that all items Discussion
were adapted from 13 pre-existing items from the Existential Anxiety Questionnaire (EAQ)
were significantly correlated to one another. KMOs Measure of Sampling Adequacy was excellent at .79,
developed by Weems, Costa, Dehon, and Berman (2004). A statistical methodologist was and Bartletts test of sphericity was significant (2 = 853.73, df = 210, p < .001), indicating suitability for The data provides support for a measure of existential anxiety encompassing Tillichs (1952) three
consulted for in-depth recommendations about the utility of the39 items. Based on these PAF. domains of existential anxiety in a hierarchical model with three distinct factors.
recommendations, we maintained the items considered essential, adapted several items An analysis of the PAF resulted in a three-factor scale with 21 items, accounting for 45% of the variance in Results from correlational analyses of related constructs indicates that the existential anxiety items
considered useful, and disposed of items that were considered redundant and the data. Additional analyses supports the existence of a second-order global factor also explaining 45% of are associated with, but not completely explained by, feelings of anxiety, depression, purpose, and
unnecessary. These adjustments resulted in a new battery of 22 items. Four respondents the variance in the data, alluding to a hierarchical model with three distinct factors that can be adequately identity distress. Particularly, this measures association with a pathological anxiety construct
were asked to pilot test the measure and results indicated that all of the items were measured in one total score. Factor loadings in this model: provides support for measuring existential anxiety as a distinct concept separate from symptomatic
Factor 1: .67 anxiety.
considered as relating to one central construct of existentialism and anxiety as denoted
Factor 2: .70 Each of the individual items in the original scale was modified in relation to comments from our
by the participants, indicating this measure has good face validity for this sample.
Factor 3: .64 statistical methodologist and pilot testers, which may have led to a different representation of both
Respondents comments allowed the researchers to assess for process validity, and we the original items and factors; thus, this measure may function as a different measure of existential
found that the participants assessed most items similarly; where there were discrepancies, The reliability of the scale and each of the three subscales is as follows:
Overall Scale: Cronbachs = .89, M = 46.11, SD = 13.19 anxiety themes and not as a direct extension of the original measure, as was originally intended.
we adjusted word choice to clear ambiguity. Participants also completed the following At N = 92, sample size is a distinct limiting factor for interpretation of EFA results and does not
Factor 1: Cronbachs = .84, M = 22.46, SD = 6.76
measures as indicators of convergent and discriminant validity, mirroring the measures meet the recommended minimum of five participants per item (Suhr, 2006).
Factor 2: Cronbachs = .79, M = 12.43, SD = 4.61
utilized in Weems et al. (2009):
Factor 3: Cronbachs = .83, M = 11.25, SD = 4.80 Participants were solicited for inclusion based on convenience sampling techniques; there may be
Purpose in Life TestRevised (PILR; Harlow, Newcomb, & Bentler, 1987). Correlational analyses indicate that the EAQ demonstrates strong discriminant and convergent validity important demographic differences between individuals who self-selected to participate and those
Identity Distress Scale (IDS; Berman, Montgomery, & Kurtines, 2004). with the following constructs: who did not that is unable to be analyzed, limiting generalizability of this data.
Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D; Radloff, 1977). Purpose: r = -.76, p < .01 Content validity of some items, particularly in the Guilt and Condemnation subscale, is mixed. This
Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ; Meyer, Miller, Metzger, & Borkovec, 1990). Identity Distress: r = .65, p < .01 may allude to difficulties with sample size, but may also be related to difficulties in conceptualizing
Acknowledgements Anxiety: r = .55, p < .01 more religious themes of guilt and condemnation in a sample representing various religious
Financial support for this convention presentation was provided by the Samuel L. and Peni P. Colville Award UMKC Womens Council Graduate
Depression: r = .70, p < .01 identities and levels of religious involvement.
Assistance Fund.