Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
On this page
IntuitionHow it worksWhen to use itStrengths & limitationsCommon pitfallsApplicationsFrequently asked🔒 Read the full methodSourcesRelated methods
Cite this pageSpotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →
Home›Social Psychology›Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS)
Process / pipelinerelationship satisfaction and love

Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS)

Also known as: RAS, Sternberg Relationship Assessment Scale

The Relationship Assessment Scale is a brief, widely used instrument for measuring global relationship satisfaction and quality in romantic partnerships. Developed by Susan Hendrick in 1988 and based on Robert Sternberg's Triangular Theory of Love, the RAS measures the three core components of love: intimacy (emotional closeness and connection), passion (attraction and desire), and commitment (dedication and decision to maintain the relationship). The RAS is valued for its brevity (7 items), applicability across diverse relationship types, and strong psychometric properties.

ScholarGate
  1. Process / pipeline
  2. v1
  3. 2 Sources
  4. PUBLISHED
Cite this page →
Tools & resources
Download slides
Learn & explore

Read the full method

Members only

Sign in with a free account to read this section.

Sign in

Method map

The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.

Relationship Assessment Scale
Attachment Style Questio…Dyadic Adjustment ScaleENRICH Marital Satisfact…

When to use it

The RAS is appropriate for couples seeking relationship assessment or therapy, research on relationship satisfaction, and longitudinal studies of relationship development. It is useful for premarital counseling, monitoring change during therapy, and screening for relationship distress in routine clinical care. The brevity makes it ideal for couples who are time-constrained. It is applicable to heterosexual and same-sex couples, though most validation work has been conducted with mixed-gender samples.

Strengths & limitations

Strengths
  • Exceptionally brief (7 items) and quick to administer and score; easily integrated into clinical practice and large surveys.
  • Grounded in a well-established theoretical model (Sternberg's Triangular Theory of Love); measures meaningful dimensions of love beyond simple satisfaction.
  • Strong psychometric properties; Cronbach α = 0.86–0.95 for total score; high test–retest reliability (r > 0.80).
  • Widely available and freely used in research; over 1,000 published studies employ the RAS.
Limitations
  • Global measure of relationship quality; does not assess specific relationship domains (e.g., communication, conflict, finances) that might inform treatment planning.
  • Does not measure or screen for intimate partner violence, abuse, or safety; must be supplemented with safety assessment.
  • May not be sensitive to detecting smaller changes in relationship satisfaction; more detailed measures may be needed for detailed outcome monitoring.
  • Primarily validated in Western samples; cross-cultural norms and interpretation guidelines are limited.

Frequently asked

How do the three RAS subscales (intimacy, passion, commitment) differ?

Intimacy measures emotional closeness, being understood, and feeling bonded; passion measures attraction, desire, and sexual connection; commitment measures the decision to maintain the relationship and invest in its future. Many couples show different profiles—e.g., high passion but low commitment (infatuation) or high commitment but low passion (companionate love). The subscale profile guides therapy: intimacy deficits may require emotional expression work, passion deficits may need to address attraction, and commitment concerns may require discussing future goals.

What does it mean if partners' RAS scores differ significantly?

Discrepancies are common and clinically important. If one partner scores much higher, it suggests that partner feels more satisfied, loved, and committed. This asymmetry often reflects power imbalances, resentment, or different expectations about the relationship. Large discrepancies (15+ points) warrant clinical exploration: Is one partner coerced to rate satisfaction highly? Does the lower-scoring partner fear leaving? Are they truly unhappy, or differently expressive?

How does the RAS differ from the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS)?

The RAS (7 items) is much briefer and measures love components (intimacy, passion, commitment) and global satisfaction. The DAS (32 items) is more comprehensive, measuring consensus, satisfaction, cohesion, and affectional expression. The RAS is ideal for rapid screening and longitudinal tracking; the DAS provides richer diagnostic information about specific areas of couple functioning. Some researchers use both.

Can the RAS be used to assess same-sex couples?

Yes. The RAS has been validated in same-sex couples and shows equivalent reliability and factor structure to heterosexual samples. However, most normative data derive from heterosexual couples; cutoff scores may differ for same-sex relationships due to different cultural norms and relationship contexts. Interpret RAS scores in same-sex couples with awareness of these contextual differences.

Is a high RAS score always good? Can high scores hide problems?

Generally, higher RAS scores indicate healthier relationships; however, some couples experiencing control, coercion, or hidden violence may report high satisfaction due to fear, shame, or distorted perceptions. Always supplement RAS with clinical interview and observation. A high RAS in a couple reporting no arguments should prompt inquiry into whether they are suppressing conflict or whether one partner controls the other.

Sources

  1. Sternberg, R. J. (1988). Triangulating love. In R. J. Sternberg & M. L. Barnes (Eds.), The psychology of love (pp. 119-138). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. link ↗
  2. Hendrick, S. S. (1988). A generic measure of relationship satisfaction. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50(1), 93-98. DOI: 10.2307/352430 ↗

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS). ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/social-psychology/relationship-assessment-scale

Related methods

Attachment Style QuestionnaireDyadic Adjustment ScaleENRICH Marital Satisfaction Scale

Which method?

Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.

  • Attachment Style QuestionnaireSocial Psychology↔ compare
  • Dyadic Adjustment ScaleSocial Psychology↔ compare
  • ENRICH Marital Satisfaction ScaleSocial Psychology↔ compare
Compare side by side →

Referenced by

Attachment Style QuestionnaireDyadic Adjustment ScaleENRICH Marital Satisfaction Scale

Similar methods

Dyadic Adjustment ScaleENRICH Marital Satisfaction ScaleAttachment Style QuestionnaireSexual Satisfaction ScaleTherapeutic Alliance ScaleRecovery Assessment ScaleExperiences in Close Relationships ScaleRapid Assessment Instrument

Related reference concepts

Therapeutic Alliance and Common FactorsCouple and Family TherapyPersonality Scales & InventoriesAssessment and Rating ScalesMarriage & FamilyGroup & Family Therapy

Spotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →

ScholarGate — Relationship Assessment Scale (Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS)). Retrieved 2026-07-21 from https://scholargate.app/en/social-psychology/relationship-assessment-scale · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026
Quick facts
Originator
Susan Hendrick (based on Sternberg's Triangular Theory of Love)
Subfamily
relationship satisfaction and love
Year
1988
Type
Self-report questionnaire
Related methods
Attachment Style QuestionnaireDyadic Adjustment ScaleENRICH Marital Satisfaction Scale
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account