RELATIONSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE
 This section provides a brief introduction to the Relationship  Questionnaire (Bartholomew & Horowitz‚ 1991) and the Relationship  Scales Questionnaire (Griffin & Bartholomew‚ 1994). Readers are  advised to conduct a review of the relevant literature in order to  thoroughly acquaint themselves with the concept of adult attachment and  the wide array of measures available to assess adult attachments in  close relationships (see‚  for example‚ Phil Shaver's attachment web page  .  Also included in this section are answers to frequently asked questions  related to the use of the Relationship Questionnaire and the  Relationship Scales Questionnaire.
We want to emphasize that research papers testing the  validity of the model do not rely on these self-report measures.   Specifically‚  validation results in Bartholomew & Horowitz (1991)  relied on ratings obtained from the Peer Attachment Interview (PAI).    Further‚ validation of the attachment dimensions (Griffin &  Bartholomew‚ 1994) are based on multiple measures of attachment  including interview measures.
Self-Report Attachment Measures:
Relationship Questionnaire  (RQ; Bartholomew & Horowitz‚ 1991).  
 The RQ is a single item measure made up of four short paragraphs‚ each  describing a prototypical attachment pattern as it applies in close  adult peer relationships.  Participants are asked to rate their degree  of correspondence to each prototype on a 7-point scale.  An individual  might rate him or herself something like: Secure 6‚ Fearful 2‚  Preoccupied 1‚ Dismissing 4.  These ratings (or "scores") provide a profile of an individual's attachment feelings and behaviour. 
The RQ can either be worded in terms of general  orientations to close relationships‚ orientations to romantic  relationships‚ or orientations to a specific relationship (or some  combination of the above). It can also be reworded in the third person  and used to rate others' attachment patterns. For instance‚ we have had  close same sex friends and romantic partners rate themselves and their  friend or partner.
The RQ was designed to obtain continuous ratings  of each of the four attachment patterns‚ and this is the ideal use of  the measure. However‚ if necessary‚ the RQ can also be used to  categorize participants into their best fitting attachment pattern. The  highest of the four attachment prototype ratings can be used to classify  participants into an attachment category. A problem arises when two or  more attachment prototypes are rated equally high.  To deal with this‚  we also ask participants to choose a single‚  best fitting attachment  pattern.   However‚ if they have not chosen a best fitting attachment  pattern‚ the researcher can either delete the participant(s) from the  data set‚ or use a method of randomly (perhaps flipping a coin)  selecting one of the two prototypes as the attachment category.   Unfortunately‚ if there is a 3-way tie for highest rating and a best  fitting attachment pattern has not been chosen‚ then there is no option  but to delete that participant's data. Although the RQ can be used  categorically‚ we do NOT recommend doing so. A continuous approach‚  using prototypes or dimensions‚ is the best approach.
**It is important to administer BOTH the forced-choice paragraph (1st page of measure) AND the likert rating scales of the paragraphs (2nd page of measure)‚ even if you will not use the RQ categorically.  Completing the forced-choice paragraph first serves as a  counterbalancing effect to minimize order effects when participants rank  the degree to which each prototype is self-characterizing.
 DERIVING SELF-MODEL AND OTHER-MODEL ATTACHMENT DIMENSIONS FOR THE RQ
The underlying attachment dimensions can be derived from  linear combinations of the prototype ratings obtained from the RQ (or  the composite attachment measure‚ see below).
Self Model - patterns characterized by positive  self models minus patterns characterized by negative self models [i.e.  (secure plus dismissing) MINUS (fearful plus preoccupied)] . If you wish  your results to correspond in the same direction to the ‘anxiety’  dimension often referred to in the attachment field‚ the calculation can  be reversed [i.e. (fearful plus preoccupied) MINUS (secure plus  dismissing)]. In the latter calculation‚ higher scores will refer to  more negative models of self.
Other Model - patterns characterized by positive  other models minus patterns characterized by negative other models  [i.e. (secure plus preoccupied) MINUS (fearful plus dismissing)].
You are encouraged to read:
 
 Griffin‚ D.‚ & Bartholomew‚ K. (1994). Models of the self and other:  Fundamental dimensions underlying measures of adult attachment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology‚ Vol. 67‚ 430-445.
Griffin‚ D.‚  & Bartholomew‚ K. (1994).     Metaphysics of measurement:  The case of adult attachment.  In K.  Bartholomew & D. Perlman (Eds.)‚ Advances in personal relationships‚ Vol. 5:  Attachment processes in adulthood (pp.17-52).  London: Jessica Kingsley.
PLEASE READ THE DIRECTIONS!
1. Following are descriptions of four general relationship styles that people often report.
Please read each description and CIRCLE the letter corresponding to the style that best describes you or is closest to the way you generally are in your close relationships.
A. It is easy for me to become  emotionally close to others. I am comfortable depending on them and  having them depend on me. I don’t worry about being alone or having  others not accept me.
B. I am uncomfortable getting close to  others. I want emotionally close relationships‚ but I find it difficult  to trust others completely‚ or to depend on them. I worry that I will be  hurt if I allow myself to become too close to others.
C. I want to be completely emotionally  intimate with others‚ but I often find that others are reluctant to get  as close as I would like. I am uncomfortable being without close  relationships‚ but I sometimes worry that others don’t value me as much  as I value them.
D. I am comfortable without close  emotional relationships. It is very important to me to feel independent  and self-sufficient‚ and I prefer not to depend on others or have others  depend on me.
Page 2
2. Please rate each of the following relationship styles according to the extent to which you think each description corresponds to your general relationship style.
A. It is easy for me to become  emotionally close to others. I am comfortable depending on them and  having them depend on me. I don’t worry about being alone or having  others not accept me.
B. I am uncomfortable getting close to  others. I want emotionally close relationships‚ but I find it difficult  to trust others completely‚ or to depend on them. I worry that I will be  hurt if I allow myself to become too close to others.
C. I want to be completely emotionally  intimate with others‚ but I often find that others are reluctant to get  as close as I would like. I am uncomfortable being without close  relationships‚ but I sometimes worry that others don’t value me as much  as I value them.
D. I am comfortable without close  emotional relationships‚ It is very important to me to feel independent  and self-sufficient‚ and I prefer not to depend on others or have others  depend on me.