Methodology note
Methodology of the Attachment style test questionnaire
This page describes where the items come from, how the score is computed and the limits of this questionnaire. It is public and asks for no sign-up.
1Where the items come from
The items are written for Brain Quiz from the published literature in the field.
The 24 items in this questionnaire were written for Brain Quiz from the literature on adult attachment. No published scale is reproduced, in whole or in part: not the Experiences in Close Relationships scale, not its revised version, not its short form, whose reuse conditions we have not established. The references below document the field explored, they are not the source of the items.
2How the score is computed
Each answer is worth 0 to 4 points, multiplied by the item weight, between 1 and 3. The four axes carry the same total weight, and the overall score is rescaled to 100. That overall score reads as an index of attachment insecurity: the higher it is, the more the answers describe relationships lived under strain. The six items on the security axis are scored in reverse to keep that single direction, so a high score on that axis signals difficulty in asking for support. Axes are computed separately, as a percentage of the maximum reachable on their own questions. The weights and the band thresholds were set by the editorial team: they come from no population calibration.
2.1The reading axes
Each item feeds a single axis. Each axis is computed as a percentage of the maximum reachable on its own items.
| Reading axis | Items |
|---|---|
| Attachment anxiety | 6 |
| Avoidance of closeness | 6 |
| Relational security (reverse-scored) | 6 |
| Handling disagreements | 6 |
2.2The reading bands
The score brought back to 100 falls into one of these bands. The bounds are set by the editorial team, and shown here.
| Band | Range out of 100 | Guidance |
|---|---|---|
| Relationships lived fairly calmly | 0 to 29 | nonea |
| A few identifiable points of strain | 30 to 54 | conversation suggestedb |
| Marked relational patterns | 55 to 74 | conversation suggestedb |
| Marked patterns across several axes | 75 to 100 | reinforced guidancec |
- No guidance message comes with this band.
- The result mentions that a conversation with a professional can help.
- The result shows a guidance message towards a health professional.
3Limits of the result
This questionnaire describes relational tendencies reported at one point in time. Those tendencies vary with the relationship you have in mind and with the period you are going through. It does not go back through your history, says nothing about your childhood, and predicts no relationship, neither its length nor its success. It can neither establish nor rule out a condition, and it does not replace a professional opinion.
4References
Each entry carries its authors, year, title, journal and identifier.
- Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511-524. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.511 opens in a new tab ↑
- Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 226-244. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.61.2.226 opens in a new tab ↑
- Fraley, R. C., Waller, N. G., & Brennan, K. A. (2000). An item response theory analysis of self-report measures of adult attachment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(2), 350-365. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.78.2.350 opens in a new tab ↑
- Wei, M., Russell, D. W., Mallinckrodt, B., & Vogel, D. L. (2007). The Experiences in Close Relationship Scale (ECR)-Short Form: Reliability, Validity, and Factor Structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 88(2), 187-204. doi:10.1080/00223890701268041 opens in a new tab ↑