Attachment Style Assessment Test

People who want to understand how they approach intimacy, dependence, conflict, and emotional distance may find the Attachment Style Assessment Test a useful starting point. It is intended for people reflecting on romantic or other close relationships, especially when recurring reactions feel difficult to explain. It functions as an attachment style quiz by turning familiar relationship situations into a structured profile for personal reflection.

What This Assessment Explores

At its centre are adult attachment patterns: how a person seeks reassurance, handles closeness, relies on another person, protects independence, or responds when a partner seems distant. The items also touch fear of rejection, jealousy, emotional disclosure, conflict reactions, and changing interest after closeness develops. The result describes tendencies to consider, not a fixed identity.

The three displayed dimensions describe different ways of experiencing closeness:

• Anxious (0-15) assesses an anxious attachment style associated with childhood psychological trauma; Low 0-4 indicates absence, Moderate 5-9 indicates moderate anxiety, and High 10-15 indicates pronounced anxiety.
• Secure (0-13) assesses secure attachment; Low security 0-4 indicates weak security, Moderate security 5-9 indicates partially established security, and High security 10-13 indicates well-established security.
• Avoidant (0-14) assesses avoidant attachment; Low 0-4 indicates no avoidant attachment style, Moderate 5-9 indicates moderate avoidance, and High 10-14 indicates pronounced avoidance.

Methodology and Scientific Basis

Each item uses a yes-or-no response, asking the respondent to decide whether a statement matches their usual experience. Answers are summarized into three displayed totals rather than a single overall label. The ranges alone do not establish how many points any individual response contributes, so the result should be read through the bands provided for each total.

Conceptually, this questionnaire is consistent with attachment research by Levine and Heller, Hazan and Shaver’s account of romantic love, and Ainsworth’s work on attachment security; it is not an adaptation of those published works.

Fraley, Waller, and Brennan’s 2000 item-response analysis is relevant because it shows how adult attachment self-report measures can represent related dimensions; it is evidence about measurement theory, not validation of this specific version. Those works’ norms and validation findings do not establish norms or validity for this online version; this questionnaire remains separate from their measures. Responses can shift with current relationship context, mood, memory, and willingness to answer candidly, so the profile is best used to guide reflection on recurring patterns rather than to settle a clinical question.