Close Relationships Attachment Questionnaire Test

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
- Strongly disagree
- Disagree
- Somewhat disagree
- Neither agree nor disagree
- Somewhat agree
- Agree
- Strongly agree
- Strongly disagree
- Disagree
- Somewhat disagree
- Neutral
- Somewhat agree
- Agree
- Strongly agree
- Strongly disagree
- Disagree
- Somewhat disagree
- Neutral
- Somewhat agree
- Agree
- Strongly agree
Close Relationships Attachment Questionnaire Test - Description and methodology of the test
People who want to examine how they respond to closeness, reassurance, dependence, and emotional support can use the Close Relationships Attachment Questionnaire Test as a structured self-reflection exercise. It is an attachment questionnaire for close relationships, suited to readers considering recurring relational patterns. The result offers a two-dimensional profile of fear of rejection and discomfort with psychological closeness, helping you consider how these tendencies appear together.
What This Assessment Explores
Items cover abandonment fears, doubts about love, concern about a partner’s interest, anger when support feels insufficient, trust, dependence, sharing, help-seeking, and self-reliance. The questionnaire examines attachment-related anxiety and avoidance in close relationships, showing whether fear of rejection, discomfort with intimacy, or both may be prominent. Together, the dimensions show whether these concerns appear at similar or different levels.
The profile includes these dimensions:
- Anxiety (15-105) is associated with fear of rejection by a close partner; Low anxiety (15-32), Moderate anxiety (33-72), and High anxiety (73-105) are bands, while higher scores may indicate relationship anxiety and lower scores may indicate confidence in attachment.
- Avoidance (15-105) reflects discomfort with psychological closeness; Low avoidance (15-25), Moderate avoidance (26-56), and High avoidance (57-105) are bands, while higher scores may indicate a tendency to avoid close relationships and lower scores indicate greater comfort with intimacy.
Methodology and Scientific Basis
Each statement uses a seven-point agreement scale, from strong disagreement to strong agreement. Items address fears, comfort with closeness, reliance on a partner, communication, and independent coping. The result presents separate Anxiety and Avoidance scores; the online questionnaire’s scoring has not been standardised.
The method is conceptually consistent with the Experiences in Close Relationships instrument, which treats adult attachment as two related dimensions, and with the romantic attachment framework of Hazan and Shaver. Fraley and colleagues add measurement context for self-report attachment scales. This questionnaire is consistent with those works, not a documented adaptation or restandardization of a published instrument.
Interpret the two scores together and consider which situations shaped your answers. In practice, this attachment profile helps connect the scores with recurring relational habits. Current relationship context, recent conflict, mood, memory, and self-awareness can influence responses. The studies support the framework, but they do not establish population norms for this online version. The result should guide reflection rather than assign a fixed attachment identity or clinical conclusion.
- Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Self-report measurement of adult romantic attachment: An integrative overview. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment Theory and Close Relationships (pp. 46-76). Guilford Press.
- Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511-524. 10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.511
- 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. 10.1037/0022-3514.78.2.350
Updated: