Future Family 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
- Make the decision primarily from my own goals while keeping them informed.
- Ask for their perspective but give my individual direction the deciding weight.
- Jointly compare both people's needs before choosing.
- Treat the future we are building together as the central deciding factor.
- A largely self-reliant household that uses professional services when extra help is needed.
- Independent day to day, with occasional help exchanged among trusted people.
- A dependable network that shares support at planned or important moments.
- A closely connected circle where practical and emotional help flows frequently in both directions.
- I would prefer to preserve my existing structure and pursue a future not centered on parenting.
- I could make modest adjustments, provided most of my current direction remained intact.
- I would reorganize important parts of life while trying to protect other core goals.
- I would willingly redesign much of my routine because active parenting would be a leading priority.
Future Family Quiz - Description and methodology of the test
People weighing parenthood, long-term partnership, personal autonomy, or community ties can use this future family quiz to turn broad hopes into a four-dimensional profile of current priorities. Reviewing your quiz about future family priorities can show how its dimensions combine, with different priorities standing out across areas of life. The result describes current preferences rather than predicting future circumstances.
What This Assessment Explores
Rather than classifying family status, this future family assessment explores appealing arrangements. Its scenarios cover parenting, commitment, autonomy, routines, support, traditions, distance, and belonging. Four dimensions are:
- Parenting-Centered Future (0-12) shows whether children are not central (Adult-centered vision 0-4), conditional (Open or conditional 5-8), or a defining priority (Parenting-centered vision 9-12).
- Partnership-First Future (0-12) shows commitment as optional (Optional Theme 0-4), meaningful with individual direction (Meaningful Partnership 5-8), or defining (Partnership-First Vision 9-12).
- Self-Directed Future (0-12) shows a shared-path lean (Shared-path lean 0-4), flexible independence (Flexible independence 5-8), or autonomy-centered choices (Autonomy-centered vision 9-12).
- Village-Connected Future (0-12) shows selective connection (Selective connection 0-4), connection with boundaries (Connected with boundaries 5-8), or village-centered belonging (Village-centered vision 9-12).
Together, these distinct scores show how priorities combine: parenting and partnership may be strong while autonomy or community remains more selective.
Methodology and Scientific Basis
Viewed as a future family test, the questionnaire uses scenario-based self-report items with four response choices. Each option represents a different balance between competing priorities, such as individual direction and joint decision-making, private space and shared routines, or independence and dependable support. Answers are grouped into the four dimensions and produce a profile rather than one overall score; because no per-answer point rule is stated, equal weighting should not be inferred.
Parenting content is conceptually consistent with the Childbearing Questionnaire (Miller, 1995) and Miller and Pasta’s 1988 fertility-motivation model. Partnership themes align conceptually with Stanley and Markman’s 1992 commitment framework, while autonomy, shared life, and belonging echo value dimensions discussed by Schwartz in 1992. These links identify comparable constructs, not provenance: the questionnaire is not presented as an adaptation of those published instruments.
The displayed bands are descriptive categories rather than population norms or clinical cutoffs. Context, self-awareness, and impression management can influence responses, so compare the profile with your circumstances and use it to guide reflection and conversation.
- Miller, Warren B. (1995). Childbearing motivation and its measurement. Journal of Biosocial Science, 27(4), 473-487. 10.1017/S0021932000023087
- Miller, Warren B., and David J. Pasta (1988). A model of fertility motivation, desires, and expectations early in women's reproductive careers. Social Biology, 35(3-4), 236-250. 10.1080/19485565.1988.9988704
- Stanley, Scott M., and Howard J. Markman (1992). Assessing Commitment in Personal Relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54(3), 595-608. 10.2307/353245
- Schwartz, Shalom H. (1992). Universals in the Content and Structure of Values: Theoretical Advances and Empirical Tests in 20 Countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1-65. 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6
Updated: