What is retained, what has been adapted, and what these assessments cannot establish.
Attachment Style Test: original measurement core
Fraley, Waller and Brennan (2000), Experiences in Close Relationships–Revised. All 36 statements, author instructions, seven response positions and reverse-scoring keys are retained. Each dimension requires its own 18 answers; keyed responses are averaged. Reverse items use 8 minus the response.
The map shows continuous anxiety and avoidance, not an attachment-style assignment. The descriptions use editorial thresholds: averages of 3 or below receive the lower-range wording, 5 or above the higher-range wording, and values between receive middle-range wording. These are writing rules, not validated boundaries; a small crossing does not establish psychological change.
The interface, selected-answer observations and reflection material have not been independently evaluated with participants. No representative norms, diagnosis or individual accuracy percentage is claimed.
This questionnaire has separate reuse conditions, including an author permission requirement for commercial purposes. It is not covered by the other questionnaire’s open licence. The source credits and author guidance are retained; no endorsement of this interface or feedback is implied.
The 50 journal Table 2 statements, ten groups of five and nine reversals are retained. The author’s thesis confirms 1–6 coding, strongly disagree/strongly agree endpoints and the factor formulas. Reverse items use 7 minus the response; five keyed answers are summed separately (5–30). The displayed mean (sum divided by five) is a convenience conversion.
The complete original participant script and intermediate labels were not found. Participant guidance, friendly headings, interface and conditional reflections are adaptations; intermediate positions remain numeric. Journal wording is retained where it differs from the thesis. The In Copyright thesis is a reference, not a redistributed asset.
Development Study 2 selected the final items using 726 participants and compared them with the original Experiences in Close Relationships questionnaire, not its revised version used in our Attachment Style Test. This is preliminary evidence, not independent validation of this web adaptation. Rumination and Disengagement had modest internal consistency (.66 and .68). Raw study data were not analysed here; population norms are not claimed.
Working answers exist in page memory. Only visitors who explicitly opt into research sharing send a separate response record to encrypted research storage. Declining does not prevent results. Research submissions are versioned, include item order and missing-answer states, and have scores independently checked on the server. No account or personal identifier is attached. Questions shuffle once per run; stable IDs keep each answer attached to its original statement.
Edited submissions are revisions of one contribution, not new independent participants. Participants can withdraw their submitted answers and scores; the privacy notice explains retention and the private reference needed to request removal after leaving the page. No general analytics scripts capture assessment answers. Research privacy notice.
Untouched statements and deliberate skips stay distinct. A scale is scored only when every one of its required answers is present. Completed scales can be viewed alongside explicitly unscored scales. This conservative partial-results policy is an interface choice, not a validated missing-data procedure.
Scores remain separate between instruments. They cannot establish childhood events, a partner’s attachment, relationship safety or compatibility. Software checks establish implementation correctness—not psychological accuracy or independent validation of the feedback.