Am I Being Cheated On Quiz

How the Scales are Structured
Who Usually Takes This Test?
See How You Compare
Below is a preview of how scores are typically distributed across each scale.
Example Questions From the Test
- There has been a modest change that my partner explained and applies consistently.
- There was a sudden pattern of concealment paired with contradictory explanations or denial of observable changes.
- There has been a marked change, and the explanation remains incomplete or difficult to discuss.
- Their boundaries are broadly stable, whether relatively private or open.
- I receive a partial answer, and it takes repeated questions to understand the basics.
- I receive a straightforward answer, even if the situation itself is inconvenient.
- The question is met with attack, blame, or pressure to stop asking, without addressing it.
- I receive an answer, though my partner seems tense or briefly defensive.
- The interaction appears consistent with our agreements and has not been concealed.
- Some behavior feels ambiguous, but it was disclosed and can be discussed.
- The interaction repeatedly approaches or crosses a stated boundary and is minimized afterward.
- I have found concealed romantic or sexual contact that violates our explicit agreement.
Am I Being Cheated On Quiz - Description and methodology of the test
People who feel unsettled by changes in a relationship can use the Am I Being Cheated On Quiz to organize observations before raising a difficult subject. It is intended for someone evaluating trust, communication, and boundaries with a partner. As a quiz about how to know if you're being cheated on, it helps someone use the results to prepare a structured conversation about concrete examples rather than treating suspicion as proof.
What This Assessment Explores
The questions focus on observable relationship situations rather than hidden facts: altered privacy, changed contact or shared time, inconsistent explanations, exclusion, outside interactions, and attempts to repair trust. It organizes vague unease into specific areas for reflection, making it useful as a relationship trust quiz without inferring that infidelity occurred or treating one clue as proof.
The three displayed dimensions describe the result:
- Availability and Connection Changes (0-15) shows whether contact and closeness remain stable: Few or isolated changes (0-5), Mixed changes (6-10), or Strong change pattern (11-15).
- Consistency and Openness (0-15) reflects how coherent explanations feel: Generally coherent (0-5), Unsettled (6-10), or Persistent inconsistency (11-15).
- Exclusivity Boundaries and Repair (0-15) reflects shared agreements and repair: Few boundary concerns (0-5), Boundary strain (6-10), or Serious boundary concern (11-15).
Methodology and Evidence Base
Each item describes a relationship situation and offers response options that distinguish stable, explained patterns from ambiguity, contradiction, concealment, boundary violations, or unsafe reactions. Its value lies in comparing related situations across communication, privacy, availability, inclusion, exclusivity, and repair, while distinguishing ordinary privacy from unexplained trust-affecting changes rather than ranking a single dramatic event.
The Weigel and Shrout (2025) study on suspicion-confirmation and avoidance strategies is the closest conceptual comparison. Hanson Sobraske, Gaulin, and Boster (2014) contribute research on sensitivity to possible rival-related cues, while Pfeiffer and Wong (1989) and Thompson and O'Sullivan (2016) support multidimensional jealousy and differing judgments about infidelity. This questionnaire is conceptually consistent with those works, not an adaptation of them.
Scoring produces three separate descriptive pattern summaries, so this trust and infidelity quiz guides interpretation through the displayed bands; it does not calculate the probability that cheating occurred. As an online self-report questionnaire, it depends on memory, context, and candid answers, with responses organized around plans, contact, explanations, boundaries, and repair. Concealed events cannot be verified by a score, so concrete examples and the relationship's safety context still matter.
- Weigel, Daniel J., & Shrout, M. Rosie. (2025). Are You Cheating on Me? Identifying Factors Contributing to the Use of Suspicion Confirmation and Avoidance Strategies. Western Journal of Communication, 89(1), 108-131. 10.1080/10570314.2024.2324382
- Hanson Sobraske, Katherine N., Gaulin, Steven J. C., & Boster, James S. (2014). Functional Variation in Sensitivity to Cues that a Partner is Cheating with a Rival. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43(7), 1267-1279. 10.1007/s10508-014-0283-5
- Pfeiffer, Susan M., & Wong, Paul T. P. (1989). Multidimensional Jealousy. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 6(2), 181-196. 10.1177/026540758900600203
- Thompson, Ashley E., & O'Sullivan, Lucia F. (2016). Drawing the Line: The Development of a Comprehensive Assessment of Infidelity Judgments. Journal of Sex Research, 53(8), 910-926. 10.1080/00224499.2015.1062840
Updated: