Experience in Close Relationship Scale – Short Form (ECR-S)

The ECR-S measures a two-dimensional structure of adult romantic attachment:

1. Anxiety – assessing fear of rejection and abandonment, need for approval, and distress over relationships
2. Avoidance – measuring discomfort with closeness, dependency, and intimate self-disclosure

For clinicians, the ECR-S offers several distinct benefits. Its brief format makes it ideal for routine clinical assessment, taking only minutes to complete while providing robust insights into relationship functioning. The measure helps clinicians quickly identify attachment-related difficulties at the core of relationship discord, as well as broader attachment themes that may impact interpersonal style or therapeutic alliance.

The ECR-S particularly excels in couple therapy and relationship counselling contexts. It helps clinicians understand each partner’s attachment style, anticipate relationship dynamics, and tailor interventions accordingly. For instance, identifying high attachment anxiety in one partner and high avoidance in another can help explain pursuit-withdrawal patterns and inform specific therapeutic strategies. The measure’s focus on current romantic relationships also makes it especially relevant for addressing presenting relationship difficulties and developing targeted treatment plans.

As well as assessing current relational patterns, the ECR-R can be used retrospectively whereby a respondent recalls how they felt during previous romantic attachments, and responds accordingly.

Scores for the ECR-S consist of two main attachment dimensions, Attachment Avoidance and Attachment Anxiety. The scoring system reflects distinct patterns of relating in close relationships:

• Attachment Avoidance (items 1,3,5,7,9,11; score range: 6 to 36): High scores indicate strong discomfort with closeness and dependency in relationships, manifesting as emotional distance, excessive self-reliance, and reluctance to share personal feelings or rely on others. Individuals with high avoidance tend to maintain rigid emotional boundaries and may employ defensive strategies to protect against perceived relationship threats.
• Attachment Anxiety (items 2,4,6,8,10,12; score range: 6 to 36): High scores reflect intense fears about relationship stability and partner availability, manifesting as hypervigilance to relationship cues, excessive need for reassurance, and difficulty maintaining emotional equilibrium when partners are unavailable. Individuals with high anxiety tend to seek excessive closeness and validation from relationship partners.

Each score is converted to a percentile based on normative data, and descriptors (Low, Average, High) are assigned based on percentile ranges:

• Low: 25th percentile or below
• Average: 26th to 74th percentile
• High: 75th percentile or above

Percentiles are computed based on an undergraduate sample, where a percentile of 50 represents typical patterns of responding. The normative sample was undergraduate students.

The interpretative text includes the Primary Attachment Pattern Analysis. This pattern analysis is based upon the specific combination of score descriptors (Low, Average, High) across both dimensions. These patterns range from secure styles (e.g., “Secure Style”) to various insecure patterns (e.g., “Fearful-Avoidant Style”, “Dismissing Style”, “Preoccupied Style”). Each pattern provides specific insights into attachment organisation and relationship dynamics, along with associated therapeutic implications and approaches. The interpretation considers interactions between the avoidant and anxious dimensions to provide a comprehensive understanding of the person’s attachment style and its implications for relationships and therapeutic work. The specificity of the overall Attachment Pattern allows for highly tailored therapeutic recommendations and insights into potential treatment challenges and opportunities.

The ECR-S was derived from the 36-item ECR by Brennan et al. (1998). Wei et al. (2007) demonstrated the ECR-S’s robust psychometric properties through six validation studies. The scale showed satisfactory internal consistency across studies with coefficient alphas ranging from .77 to .86 for the Anxiety subscale and .78 to .88 for the Avoidance subscale. Test-retest reliability over a 1-month period was strong, with coefficients of .80 and .83 for Anxiety and Avoidance subscales respectively. The factor structure analysis confirmed two relatively orthogonal dimensions (Anxiety and Avoidance) that provided a good fit to the data after removing response sets, with CFI values ranging from .95 to .97 across studies.

Consistent with the attachment theory predictions, the construct validity of the ECR-S was supported by the positive association of attachment anxiety with emotional reactivity and the positive association of attachment avoidance with emotional cutoff (Wei et al. 2007). Convergent validity was established through correlation analyses with various tests (Wei et al. 2007): Excessive reassurance seeking was significantly associated with attachment anxiety but not with attachment avoidance. Depression was significantly associated with both attachment anxiety and avoidance.

Normative data from college students collected by Wei et al. (2007) has been synthesised to produce means and standard deviations for scores and subscales. The primary sample consisted of 851 undergraduate students from a large public university. Participants ranged in age from 18 to 45 years (M = 20.36 years, SD = 2.04).

• Anxiety Subscale (6 items; M = 21.73, SD = 7.04)
• Avoidance Subscale (6 items; M = 16.28, SD = 6.97)

NovoPsych determined descriptors for each of the attachment scores that are determined by percentiles. The percentile ranges chosen were consistent with previous attachment researchers (e.g., Kaitz et al., 2004; Mayseless & Scher, 2000; Rain et al., 2016):

• ‘High’ scores: 75th percentile or more
• ‘Low’ scores: 25th percentile or less
• ‘Average’ scores: 26th-74th percentile

The NovoPsych version of the ECR-S employs a sophisticated pattern analysis system that examines the interplay between avoidant and anxious attachment dimensions. These attachment patterns were developed by three PhD level psychologists with extensive clinical experience (Hegarty, D., Smyth, C., Buchanan, B., 2024). The analysis generates attachment pattern interpretations based on specific combinations of scores across dimensions. Patterns focus on the fundamental interaction between anxious and avoidant attachment dimensions, categorising individuals into broader attachment styles. For example:

• Secure Style (avoidance and anxiety both below 75th percentile)
• Fearful-Avoidant Style (high avoidance, high anxiety: both above 75th percentile)
• Dismissive-Avoidant Style (high avoidance, low anxiety)
• Anxious-Preoccupied Style (low avoidance, high anxiety)

This dual-level pattern analysis system, supported by empirical attachment research (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Brennan et al., 1998), provides both the specificity needed for clinical intervention and the broader categorical framework useful for research and general understanding of attachment organisation.

Assess your patients with the Experience in Close Relationship Scale – Short Form using a NovoPsych account

• For Psychologists & Mental Health Clinicians
• Send Assessments to Patient’s Phone
• Receive Comprehensive Reports
• Access Over 100 Validated Assessments​
• Instant Psychometric Scoring
• Track Symptoms​
• Inform Treatment​