{{ chartLead }}
The gauge stays on the official 7 to 49 AAQ-2 total. Lower totals mean stronger flexibility support, while higher totals mean inner experiences are more likely to narrow action.
{{ interpretationLead }}
Read the stronger and lower-support items together so the next practice targets stay tied to the same seven-item profile.
| Focus lane | Item | Response | Read | Practice cue | Copy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| {{ row.laneLabel }} | {{ row.short }} | {{ row.answerLabel }} | {{ row.readLabel }} | {{ row.practiceCue }} |
The band below uses the Hayes AAQ-2 handout for the 24 to 28 reference band and keeps everything else non-diagnostic.
| Total | Read | How to use it |
|---|---|---|
| {{ row.rangeLabel }} | {{ row.label }} | {{ row.guide }} |
| # | Prompt | Response | Read | Copy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| {{ row.id }} | {{ row.prompt }} | {{ row.answerLabel }} | {{ row.readLabel }} |
Psychological flexibility is the ability to stay in contact with difficult thoughts, feelings, memories, or body sensations without letting them automatically shut down valued action. This assessment uses the open-source Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II to look at that pattern in a short seven-item format.
In plain language, the score asks whether hard inner experiences are becoming traffic controllers for behavior. Lower totals suggest that those experiences are less likely to dominate what happens next. Higher totals suggest that avoidance, struggle, or fusion with difficult thoughts may be crowding out the actions you care about.
That makes the tool useful as a reflection aid for therapy prep, coaching, or self-review. It is not a diagnosis, and it does not tell you why flexibility is lower on a given day. It only summarizes how strongly that pattern shows up in the completed responses.
The AAQ-2 total runs from 7 to 49. Lower scores indicate stronger flexibility support, while higher scores indicate more psychological inflexibility or experiential avoidance. This tool keeps the official total visible on the gauge and adds the 24 to 28 reference band often discussed in Steven Hayes training material as a useful context line rather than as a stand-alone diagnostic boundary.
The output also breaks the run into practical review targets. You can see which items are acting like support anchors and which items are adding the most drag to the total. That helps turn a single number into something more actionable, especially if one or two items are carrying most of the strain.
Start with the item pattern before you react to the total. A score inside or above the reference band is more informative when you know which statements are doing the work. If one item is clearly highest, that item is usually the best first practice target. If several items rise together, the pattern may be broader and worth discussing in a fuller treatment context.
Recheck under comparable conditions. Because the AAQ-2 is a self-report snapshot, scores can move with pain, burnout, panic, grief, overwork, or recent conflict. Comparing a quiet week against a crisis week may show real change, but it can also mix long-term style with short-term load.
If the pattern stays high and daily life is narrowing around avoidance, shutdown, or emotional struggle, use the item review as a clean handoff into therapy, coaching, or clinical follow-up. The most useful conversation is usually concrete: which situations are hardest, which inner experiences show up there, and what valued action keeps getting crowded out.