Are We a Good Match 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
- We both want a similar balance of couple time, friendships, and family involvement.
- Our preferences are mostly compatible, with occasional negotiation around specific events.
- One of us generally participates more or less than preferred to accommodate the other.
- We want sharply different levels of involvement, and the issue regularly creates tension.
- We have discussed it and want essentially the same kind of commitment.
- We seem broadly aligned, though one or two expectations still need clarification.
- One of us has adjusted expectations more than the other to keep the relationship moving.
- We want meaningfully different levels or forms of commitment.
- One person's preferred way of clearing it up usually wins, whether or not it suits the other.
- We favor different repair methods, such as calling versus waiting, and often remain out of sync.
- We can adapt to each other's repair styles, though it takes some deliberate effort.
- We naturally agree on how to clarify the meaning and reconnect.
Are We a Good Match Quiz - Description and methodology of the test
Couples who want to examine how their relationship works in ordinary situations can use the Are We a Good Match Quiz to organize observations about mutual fit. It is intended for partners exploring expectations around closeness, communication, shared priorities, and future plans. It functions as an are we a match quiz, turning familiar moments into a structured starting point for focused conversation.
What This Test Measures
The items examine compatibility: affection, independence, support, contact, repair, conflict timing, reliability, shared plans, and future direction. Results highlight ease, accommodation, and differences worth discussing.
The dimensions examined by an are we the perfect match quiz include:
- Closeness and Support Fit (0-15) reflects whether affection, independence, dependability, and emotional support complement each other: Different Needs (0-5) means mismatch; Growing Fit (6-10) shows a workable foundation; Mutual Ease (11-15) indicates comfortable closeness and space.
- Communication Style Fit (0-15) reflects how naturally communication habits work together: Different Rhythms (0-5) signals clashes; Workable Overlap (6-10) shows partial alignment; Natural Flow (11-15) indicates aligned clarification and repair.
- Values and Direction Fit (0-15) reflects alignment in priorities, lifestyle, and direction: Diverging Priorities (0-5) signals differences; Mixed Alignment (6-10) combines shared ground with compromise; Shared Direction (11-15) indicates matching visions; it does not predict relationship duration.
Methodology and Evidence Base
Each item presents a situation with four responses ranging from alignment to tension, giving this good match quiz a practical focus. The respondent selects the description closest to the couple's usual pattern. Items cover support, repair, independence, follow-through, priorities, and future planning.
The questionnaire reports bands rather than a published weighting rule; read them as summaries, not as evidence of how individual options contribute. A higher band signals alignment on that dimension, not a global judgment.
Themes in this questionnaire are conceptually consistent with Poon's 2008 couple-assessment approach, but it is not an adaptation of that tool. This questionnaire has no documented reliability estimates, norms, or standardized scoring. Locke and Wallace (1959) provide a historical adjustment model, while Fowers and Olson (1986) offer an example of studying relationship patterns.
Rather than deciding whether partners are a perfect match, the result offers a focused reflection on specific areas of fit; self-report may reflect mood or unequal perspectives, and the profile does not assess safety, attachment style, or mental health.
- Poon, Vincent H. K. (2008). Love matters: A counseling tool to assess couple relationships. Canadian Family Physician, 54(6), 858-859.
- Locke, Harvey J., and Karl M. Wallace. (1959). Short Marital-Adjustment and Prediction Tests: Their Reliability and Validity. Marriage and Family Living, 21(3), 251-255. 10.2307/348022
- Fowers, Blaine J., and David H. Olson. (1986). Predicting Marital Success with PREPARE: A Predictive Validity Study. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 12(4), 403-413. 10.1111/j.1752-0606.1986.tb00673.x
Updated: