Thick vs Fat 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
- I would choose one of those words because the distinction feels useful to me.
- I would choose one but explain that it only partly fits.
- I would say that both can fit, depending on the context.
- I would answer in my own terms because that either-or choice does not represent me.
- Select the one that comes closest and leave it at that.
- Select one, though I would want a little room to qualify it.
- Choose both or add a more precise term if the form allows it.
- Write my own description or skip the body label entirely.
- I would choose language unrelated to “thick.”
- I might use it playfully or in a very specific context.
- I often find it more fitting than general size labels.
- It is the body label I most naturally choose for myself.
Thick vs Fat Quiz - Description and methodology of the test
People who are unsure whether “thick,” “fat,” both, or neither feels like a fitting description can use the Thick vs Fat Quiz to examine that preference without forcing a single category. It is intended for personal reflection on body language and identity, and an Am I Fat or Thick Quiz result points to the label pattern that feels most meaningful in your own responses.
What This Assessment Explores
The questionnaire explores how body language relates to shape, size, identity, and context-not a health or BMI measure. Questions touch on self-description, representation, clothing fit, body changes, and neutral wording. The three result dimensions are:
- Fat (0-15) reflects affinity with “fat” as a neutral or reclaimed identity word: Little affinity (0-5), Contextual affinity (6-10), Strong affinity (11-15).
- My Own Label (0-15) reflects preference for personal, flexible, combined, or label-free language: Category-oriented (0-5), Flexible wording (6-10), Self-defined language (11-15).
- Thick (0-15) reflects affinity with “thick” as a shape- or proportion-focused label: Little affinity (0-5), Contextual affinity (6-10), Strong affinity (11-15).
The highest score shows strongest affinity; scores within one point create a blended profile, making this thick or fat test a prompt for choosing language rather than judging appearance.
Methodology and Evidence Base
Each item presents an everyday situation and four response choices. Options range from rejecting both labels or choosing another description to accepting one term, combining terms, or claiming a label strongly. Results are summarized across three totals; the displayed ranges do not reveal an item-by-item point rule.
Conceptually, the content aligns most closely with the Fat Identification Scale (Lindly et al., 2014), which examines identification with fatness and responses to stigma. This questionnaire is not an adaptation of that instrument. The Fat Acceptance Scale (Kase and Mohr, 2022) and research on curvy-ideals internalization add context for acceptance, identity language, and shape-focused ideals, but they do not standardize this online measure.
Interpret the profile as a snapshot of preferred language. Answers can reflect current context, self-awareness, and comfort with reclaimed or unfamiliar terms, so the result may shift and does not establish medical status or fixed identity. The thick vs fat test works best as structured self-reflection, with close scores read as a blended pattern.
- Lindly, Olivia J., Michelle R. Nario-Redmond, and Jeffrey G. Noel. “Creatively re-defining fat: Identification predicts strategic responses to stigma, ingroup attitudes, and well-being.” Fat Studies, 3(2), 179-195, 2014. 10.1080/21604851.2014.865968
- Kase, Colleen A., and Jonathan J. Mohr. “The Fat Acceptance Scale: Development and initial validation.” Journal of Counseling Psychology, 69(3), 311-325, 2022. 10.1037/cou0000583
- Walker, D. Catherine, Sarah E. Gaither, Bonelyn De Los Santos, Jessica Keigan, Lauren M. Schaefer, and J. Kevin Thompson. “Development and validation of a measure of curvy ideals internalization.” Body Image, 43, 217-231, 2022. 10.1016/j.bodyim.2022.09.005
Updated: