Assessment
Attachment & Relationship Style
30 questions about how you actually behave when it matters.
A structured self-reflection questionnaire about closeness, reassurance, independence and conflict in your close relationships. It describes where you sit on continuous dimensions — it does not sort you into a type, diagnose anything, or predict what will happen.
- Questions
- 30
- Time
- ~7 minutes
- Signup
- Not required
- Result
- Instant
What’s involved
- All 30 questions, with no time limit
- Answers save as you go, so you can come back later
- No signup and no email address
What your result shows
- Where you sit on the two main dimensions, in plain words, and what that language does and does not mean
- Your position on both attachment dimensions, explained
- Six further dimensions: closeness, reassurance, independence, conflict, communication and uncertainty
- What this combination tends to look like day to day
- Where it tends to create friction, and with whom
- What tends to help, written as things to try rather than things to be
- Questions worth asking yourself, and a conversation worth having
Scored the moment you finish, and yours to keep at a private link.
Before you start
- Answer for how you actually behave, not how you would like to behave. Nobody sees this but you.
- This describes a position on continuous dimensions. It does not put you in a box, and where you sit changes with the relationship you are in and with time.
- Built for self-reflection: it is not a clinical or diagnostic instrument, it is not therapy, and it cannot tell you whether a relationship will work.
- If your relationships are causing you real distress, a qualified therapist can help in a way a questionnaire cannot.
Your answers save as you go, so you can close this and come back later.
Methodology, limitations and validation status
What it measures. Two broad dimensions from the adult-attachment literature — anxiety (how much attention goes to where you stand) and avoidance (how much of yourself you keep back) — plus secure-base behaviour and six narrower dimensions: comfort with closeness, need for reassurance, need for independence, conflict approach, emotional communication and response to uncertainty. It describes self-reported behaviour in close relationships, not a personality type and not a condition.
Where the items come from. All 30 items were written for MindScore. No items are taken from the ECR, ECR-R, AAI, RQ or any other published or proprietary attachment instrument. The two-dimensional anxiety–avoidance framing is a published theoretical model used here as a public framework; this implementation of it is entirely original and entirely untested.
How it is scored. Each item contributes a normalised 0-1 value to one dimension, with reverse-scored items mirrored. A dimension score is the mean of its items on a 0-100 scale. Eight of the nine dimensions are bipolar: a high score is a position, not an achievement, and only secure-base behaviour contributes to the headline band. The four familiar style labels are read off the anxiety and avoidance scores as regions of a two-dimensional space, and the report says so explicitly rather than assigning you to a category.
Validation status. Not validated. No norming sample exists, no reliability or factor-structure statistics have been collected, and no relationship between these scores and any real-world outcome has been established. The dimensional framing is drawn from published theory; these items and this scoring are ours and are untested.
- This is a self-report questionnaire about how you believe you behave. It cannot see what you actually do, and self-report on this subject is known to be flattering in some directions and harsh in others.
- Attachment positions are not fixed traits. They move with the relationship you are in, with what is happening in your life, and over years. A result is a snapshot of how you answered today.
- It describes one person. Relationships are two people, and a pattern that causes friction with one partner can be unremarkable with another.
- The four familiar style names are convenient labels for regions of a continuous space. Very few people sit squarely in one, and treating them as categories is the single most common misuse of this framework.
- It is not a clinical or diagnostic instrument, it does not screen for any condition, and it is not therapy or a substitute for it.
- It cannot predict whether a relationship will last, and nothing in the report attempts to.
Assessment version 1 · scoring version 1