Trauma Bond 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
- They drive or operate it normally and do not use movement as leverage.
- Their criticism or agitation distracts me and makes the journey feel tense.
- They drive recklessly or refuse a reasonable request to stop or let me out.
- They threaten a crash, trap me in the vehicle, deliberately strike something, or cause injury.
- They minimize it at first but can later acknowledge some of the impact.
- They take responsibility, make room for my response, and show sustained change.
- Intense affection or promises bring relief, but the same treatment repeatedly returns.
- They blame me and threaten abandonment, exposure, or retaliation if I discuss what happened.
- Affection or contact is withheld until I give in, apologize, or prove my loyalty.
- Either person may request space, with a clear and respectful plan to reconnect.
- Communication sometimes becomes noticeably cooler, although I can still raise my concerns.
- Long silences or sudden rejection leave me scrambling to restore the relationship on the other person's terms.
Trauma Bond Quiz - Description and methodology of the test
People trying to understand recurring control, fear, pressure, or confusing closeness can use this trauma bond quiz as a structured self-reflection tool. It is intended for anyone reviewing a relationship with a partner, family member, caregiver, or peer and wanting clearer language for what is happening. A reader may begin with Am I trauma bonded? and use the result to organize concerns about coercion, intermittent warmth, dependence, and safety.
What This Assessment Explores
These items focus on situations that can be hard to interpret: alternating harm and affection, punishment for boundaries, dependence, intimidation, and threats. The result distinguishes emotional control, physical safety, sexual consent, or several areas together. Someone asking Am I in a trauma bond? may use the summary to name what needs attention.
The result screen groups those themes into three scales:
- Emotional Control and Neglect (0-15) reflects withheld care, humiliation, dependence, or coercive control; bands are No scored endorsement (0), Worth noticing (1-2), and Action recommended (3-15).
- Physical Force and Safety (0-15) reflects intimidation, blocked movement, restraint, injury, weapons, or threats; bands are No scored endorsement (0), Pattern worth noticing (1-2), and Action recommended (3-15).
- Sexual Boundaries and Consent (0-15) reflects pressure, reproductive coercion, non-consensual material, or contact without free choice; bands are No scored endorsement (0), Worth noticing (1-2), and Action recommended (3-15).
Methodology and Evidence Base
Each item offers four descriptions, moving from respectful responses through pressure, control, intimidation, and severe harm. This lets a respondent choose the situation that most closely matches lived experience rather than answer yes or no. A result may prompt the question Is it a trauma bond? while keeping attention on specific patterns rather than a label. Results are shown by scale, and any concerning endorsement matters independently; a single red-flag response overrides the total.
Traumatic bonding theory (Dutton & Painter, 1993) provides the conceptual anchor for cycles in which harm and intermittent warmth coexist. The themes are conceptually consistent with the Composite Abuse Scale (Hegarty, Bush, & Sheehan, 2005), its revised short form (Ford-Gilboe et al., 2016), and the WHO multi-country study (2005). This questionnaire is not an adaptation or standardized administration of those published instruments.
A reader may ask Do I have a trauma bond? The bands are unvalidated reflective summaries, not severity, legal, or clinical cutoffs. Self-report can shift with memory, current context, self-awareness, and willingness to disclose; neglect-like experiences may also reflect poverty, disability, or unavailable care, so context matters without erasing harm. Immediate danger requires local emergency help.
- Dutton, D. G., & Painter, S. (1993). Emotional attachments in abusive relationships: A test of traumatic bonding theory. Violence and Victims, 8(2), 105-120. 10.1891/0886-6708.8.2.105
- Hegarty, K., Bush, R. A. B., & Sheehan, M. (2005). The composite abuse scale: Further development and assessment of reliability and validity of a multidimensional partner abuse measure in clinical settings. Violence and Victims, 20(5), 529-547. 10.1891/0886-6708.2005.20.5.529
- World Health Organization. (2005). WHO multi-country study on women's health and domestic violence against women: Initial results on prevalence, health outcomes and women's responses. Geneva: World Health Organization. ISBN 924159358X.
- Ford-Gilboe, M., Wathen, C. N., Varcoe, C., MacMillan, H. L., Scott-Storey, K., Mantler, T., Hegarty, K., & Perrin, N. (2016). Development of a brief measure of intimate partner violence experiences: The Composite Abuse Scale (Revised)-Short Form (CASR-SF). BMJ Open, 6(12), e012824. 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012824
Updated: