What is your attachment style in relationships?
Attachment theory describes four distinct patterns of how adults relate to intimate partners. The topic has exploded on social media, but most online quizzes have no validated psychology behind them. The version below is built on the original Hazan and Shaver items used in the nationally representative work that defined population norms. Take it to see where your pattern sits and how common it actually is.
Rate each statement: 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly agree. Items 1 to 4 of 10.
Items 5 to 7 of 10.
Items 8 to 10 of 10.
Calculating your result…
Try the relationship health quiz
A Gottman-based framework for assessing your relationship.
What are the 4 attachment styles?
Attachment theory was originally developed by John Bowlby to describe how infants bond with caregivers. Mary Ainsworth's Strange Situation experiments in the 1970s identified three infant attachment patterns: secure, anxious-ambivalent, and avoidant. Cindy Hazan and Phillip Shaver applied this framework to adult romantic relationships in 1987, identifying the same three patterns in adults. Main and Hesse later described a fourth, disorganised, originally observed in infants and subsequently mapped onto adult relationships.
Secure attachment describes adults who find it relatively easy to form close relationships, are comfortable with interdependence, and do not experience high anxiety about relationship continuity. Anxious attachment describes adults who crave closeness but worry persistently about their partner's feelings, often experiencing fear of abandonment. Avoidant attachment describes adults who are uncomfortable with emotional closeness and self-reliant to the point of discomfort with depending on others. Disorganised attachment combines elements of both anxiety and avoidance, often with roots in early experiences of fear of caregivers.
How common is secure attachment?
The nationally representative sample by Mickelson, Kessler, and Shaver (1997), published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, found that approximately 56% of US adults reported secure attachment patterns, 19% reported anxious patterns, and 25% reported avoidant patterns. A small percentage, roughly 5%, showed disorganised features. This distribution is notable because online discourse about attachment is dominated by anxious and avoidant voices, creating a perception that insecure attachment is the majority experience when the data suggest the opposite.
Estimates vary across studies depending on measurement tools and populations sampled. Studies using dimensional approaches rather than categorical classification find that most individuals show some features of multiple styles. The Mickelson et al. figure remains among the most-cited population-level estimates because of its nationally representative sampling.
Can attachment styles change?
Research on attachment stability is mixed. Earlier work suggested attachment patterns were relatively stable across adult life. More recent longitudinal research has found meaningful change over time, particularly following significant relationships. A securely attached partner can have a corrective effect on an insecure person's attachment, a process sometimes called earned security. Therapeutic work, particularly attachment-focused therapy, has shown measurable shifts toward more secure functioning in clinical samples.
Attachment is better conceptualised as a set of working models, or mental templates about relationships and self-worth, rather than as a fixed personality type. These models can update with new relational experiences, though the degree of change depends heavily on the intensity and quality of the corrective relationship experience. Our narcissism test explores another personality dimension that research suggests can shift over adult life.
Frequently asked questions
Yes. Mickelson et al. (1997) estimated disorganised or fearful attachment at roughly 5% of the adult population, making it the least common of the four patterns. Some researchers argue disorganised features are underreported in self-report measures because individuals with this style may lack consistent awareness of their own attachment behaviour. Clinical samples show higher rates of disorganised attachment, particularly in populations with trauma histories.
Yes, though research suggests anxious-anxious pairings can produce high relationship volatility. Both partners hyperactivating their attachment systems simultaneously can lead to escalating conflict cycles and difficulty with de-escalation. If both partners have awareness of their patterns and strong communication skills, the relationship can also be characterised by high intensity of positive connection. Couple therapy outcomes for anxious-anxious pairings are generally favourable when both partners engage.
The anxious-avoidant pairing is one of the most commonly discussed attachment dynamics. The anxiously attached partner's pursuit of closeness triggers the avoidantly attached partner's need for distance, which in turn amplifies the anxious partner's fear of abandonment and escalates their pursuit behaviour. Research by Fraley and Shaver confirmed that this pursuer-withdrawer dynamic is predicted by the combination of anxious and avoidant attachment styles. The cycle is self-reinforcing and can persist without both partners developing awareness of their contribution to it.
Based on the Mickelson et al. (1997) nationally representative sample, yes: 56% of US adults are classified as securely attached. The proportion varies by study, population, and measurement approach. Some studies using dimensional rather than categorical classification find lower secure rates. What is consistent across studies is that secure attachment is the modal pattern in Western adult samples, meaning it is the most common single category even when insecure types are combined.
- Hazan C, Shaver P. Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1987;52(3):511-524.
- Mickelson KD, Kessler RC, Shaver PR. Adult attachment in a nationally representative sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1997;73(5):1092-1106.