Marital Psychological Distance Scale 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
- A) It is hurtful if one spouse forgets to congratulate the other on their shared anniversary.
- B) It is inevitable that some dates may be forgotten; this does not mean there is no love.
- A) Most married people always feel like the master of the house, even if relatives live with them.
- B) Many married people like to get up earlier than others because only then do they feel as if they are alone in the home and feel like the master of the house.
- A) It is quite possible to eat without waiting for the family to gather at the table.
- B) Eating lunch alone is very difficult; I cannot eat a bite.
Marital Psychological Distance Scale Test - Description and methodology of the test
People who want to understand where closeness is shared or divided in their marriage may find the Marital Psychological Distance Scale Test a useful starting point. Spouses reflecting on everyday expectations, boundaries, companionship, and intimacy can use this marital psychological distance questionnaire to organize their thoughts. The profile organizes these themes into interpretable dimensions, giving couples a clearer basis for conversation about connection and difference.
What This Assessment Explores
This marital closeness assessment covers:
- Values Distance (0-19) measures similarity in values and attitudes: Low alignment 0-6; Moderate alignment 7-13; High alignment 14-19.
- Social Ties Distance (0-13) measures social integration: Low integration 0-4; Moderate integration 5-9; High integration 10-13.
- Daily Routine and Time-Use Habits Distance (0-6) measures time coordination: Low alignment 0-2; Moderate alignment 3-4; High alignment 5-6.
- Personal Belongings Distance (0-8) measures openness about property: More guarded 0-2; Some openness 3-5; Very open 6-8.
- Territorial Distance (0-10) measures shared space: Separated territory 0-3; Mixed territory 4-7; Shared territory 8-10.
- Physical Distance (0-13) measures physical closeness: Low physical closeness 0-4; Moderate physical closeness 5-9; High physical closeness 10-13.
- Overall Closeness (0-69) reflects closeness across dimensions: Low closeness 0-27; Moderate closeness 28-50; High closeness 51-69.
Methodology and Evidence Base
Each item presents two contrasting statements about a familiar marital situation, including support, friendship, privacy, household activity, leisure, and intimacy. The respondent selects the alternative that best represents their view. This forced-choice format captures expectations and preferences, which may shift with mood, conflict, or relationship stage.
The questionnaire presents separate dimension totals and an overall total. Higher scores represent greater unity, integration, coordination, openness, shared territory, physical closeness, or harmony according to the relevant scale definition. Printed bands locate each result within its range, helping compare patterns across dimensions and organize themes for reflection.
As an online marital psychological distance measure, the questionnaire is conceptually consistent with Kurbatkina’s Psychological Distance in Marriage Questionnaire and related work by Christensen and Shenk on psychological distance in couples. The online questionnaire is a structured self-report profile, and those sources do not serve as validation for this version. Honest responding, self-awareness, and present circumstances can shape results, limiting causal or predictive interpretation.
- Kurbatkina, Yulia Viktorovna. (2006). Experience of Creating a New Questionnaire "Psychological Distance in Marriage". Psychological Diagnostics, No. 3, pp. 47-67.
- Kurbatkina, Yulia Viktorovna. (2006). Psychological Distance in Marriage: Dissertation for the Degree of Candidate of Psychological Sciences. Moscow, 174 pp.
- Christensen, Andrew, and James L. Shenk. (1991). Communication, Conflict, and Psychological Distance in Nondistressed, Clinic, and Divorcing Couples. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59(3), 458-463. 10.1037/0022-006X.59.3.458
Updated: