Authenticity in Relationships Scale (AIRS) 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
- 1: Not true at all
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5: Somewhat true
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9: Very true
- 1: Not at all true
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5: Somewhat true
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9: Very true
- 1: Does not apply at all
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5: Applies to some extent
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9: Applies very much
Authenticity in Relationships Scale (AIRS) Test - Description and methodology of the test
People who want to understand how genuine and open they feel with a partner can use this assessment to examine everyday authenticity in romantic relationships. The Authenticity in Relationships Scale (AIRS) Test is especially relevant when you are reflecting on withheld opinions, vulnerability, or the balance between honesty and closeness. It can support reflection on your own communication and intimacy patterns, including how you handle disclosure and honesty.
What This Assessment Explores
At its core, the questionnaire examines authenticity in closeness: expressing thoughts and feelings, remaining yourself with a partner, and tolerating disclosure risks. It also asks about avoided topics, concealed opinions, inaccurate self-presentation, and what remains unknown between partners. These themes place self-disclosure in relationships alongside honesty and vulnerability, rather than treating disclosure alone as authenticity.
The two displayed scales describe separate dimensions:
- Unacceptability of Lying and Deception (4-36) measures attitudes toward lying and deception; 4-18 is More tolerant of deception, while 19-36 is Strongly rejects deception.
- Intimacy Risk Acceptance (6-54) measures willingness to be vulnerable and self-disclosing; 6-38 is Cautious with intimacy risks, while 39-54 is Open to intimacy risks.
Read the result bands independently: a position in one does not predict the label in the other, so the dimensions can be considered together without becoming one authenticity score.
Methodology and Scientific Basis
Each statement uses a nine-point continuum, moving from 'not true' or 'does not apply' to 'very true' or 'applies very much.' Items cover openness, avoidance, concealment, impression management, and uncertainty, so answers should reflect experience rather than an ideal relationship. Responses form two displayed scale scores, but the questionnaire does not specify weighting or reverse-scoring; the ranges alone do not establish a point-by-point scoring rule.
For someone examining emotional openness in relationships, the items connect private disclosure with possible discomfort, misunderstanding, or rejection.
The questionnaire is conceptually consistent with Authenticity in Relationships Scale (Lopez & Rice, 2006), but it is not presented as an adaptation of that instrument. Kernis and Goldman’s multicomponent model frames authenticity through awareness, unbiased processing, behavior, and relational orientation. Wickham, Reed, and Williamson’s AIRS-SF study provides a short-form psychometric reference, but does not establish that this online questionnaire has the same items, norms, reliability, or validity. Because responses are self-reported, current context, self-awareness, and response bias can affect answers; scores are most useful alongside the situations that prompted reflection.
- Lopez, Frederick G., and Kenneth G. Rice. (2006). Preliminary Development and Validation of a Measure of Relationship Authenticity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(3), 362-371. 10.1037/0022-0167.53.3.362
- Wickham, R. E., Reed, D. E., and Williamson, R. E. (2015). Establishing the psychometric properties of the Self and Perceived-partner Authenticity in Relationships Scale-Short Form (AIRS-SF): Measurement invariance, reliability, and incremental validity. Personality and Individual Differences, 77, 62-67. 10.1016/j.paid.2014.12.049
- Kernis, Michael H., and Brian M. Goldman. (2006). A Multicomponent Conceptualization of Authenticity: Theory and Research. In Mark P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 283-357. Academic Press. 10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38006-9
Updated: