A recent study, published in the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, introduces a new tool designed to measure gaslighting in romantic relationships. The Gaslighting Relationship Exposure Inventory (GREI) consists of 11 items and was found to be a reliable and valid measure for both men and women across two different cultural samples—Israel and the United States. The study also highlights that exposure to gaslighting is closely related to psychological abuse and can contribute to mental health issues, such as depression, while also negatively affecting relationship quality.
Gaslighting is a form of manipulation in which one person makes another doubt their own perceptions, memories, or reality. In the context of romantic relationships, gaslighting can involve a partner repeatedly invalidating their partner’s experiences. They might deny that certain events took place, accuse their partner of overreacting, or suggest their partner is confused or mistaken. Over time, this manipulative behavior can erode the gaslightee’s confidence and self-trust, leading to feelings of disorientation and emotional distress.
Gaslighting is particularly harmful because it can make victims question their sense of reality. The subtle nature of gaslighting often leaves victims unaware of the manipulation for long periods. The authors behind the new research sought to provide a scientifically validated tool that can reliably measure the extent of gaslighting exposure in intimate relationships. Until now, there has been a shortage of such tools, hindering both research on the subject and efforts to support those affected by it.
“Our interest in this topic stems from our shared interest in relationship dynamics and the intriguing complexity of gaslighting. We were particularly motivated to examine the impact of gaslighting in comparison to other forms of abuse,” said study author Tair Tager-Shafrir of The Max Stern Yezreel Valley College.
“Many people often perceive gaslighting as a less harmful form of abuse due to its everyday nature and seemingly less overt manifestation. However, our research revealed that this type of abuse has very significant negative effects, no less impactful than other forms of psychological abuse. We felt it was crucial to investigate this often misunderstood form of abuse and its consequences.”
To develop and validate the GREI, the researchers conducted two studies involving participants from Israel and the United States, all of whom were currently in romantic relationships. The sample for the first study included 509 Israeli adults, while the second study involved 395 participants from the United States.
In both studies, participants were asked to complete an online survey that included the 11-item GREI, which was developed based on extensive literature on gaslighting. The GREI items reflected key aspects of gaslighting behavior, such as denying events that occurred, making the partner doubt their memory, and minimizing or dismissing the partner’s feelings. Respondents rated the frequency with which these behaviors occurred on a scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always).
In addition to the GREI, participants completed other established questionnaires to measure their experiences of intimate partner violence, mental health, and relationship satisfaction. Specifically, the study used the Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS2) to measure physical assault, psychological abuse, and economic control in relationships. The researchers also measured depression using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and relationship quality using the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS-7). These additional measures allowed the researchers to examine how gaslighting exposure was related to other forms of abuse, mental health outcomes, and the overall quality of the relationship.
The researchers first tested the GREI for reliability, meaning they examined whether the tool consistently measured gaslighting behaviors across different participants. They found that the GREI was highly reliable, with strong internal consistency across both samples.
Next, they conducted statistical analyses to assess the validity of the GREI—whether it was accurately measuring the construct of gaslighting and distinguishing it from other related behaviors. The results showed that gaslighting exposure, as measured by the GREI, was strongly correlated with psychological abuse, supporting its convergent validity. At the same time, gaslighting had weaker correlations with other forms of abuse, such as physical assault and economic control, suggesting that the GREI was capturing a distinct form of psychological manipulation.
The researchers found that participants who experienced more gaslighting reported higher levels of depression and lower relationship quality, even after accounting for other forms of intimate partner violence. This suggests that gaslighting has distinct and harmful effects on an individual’s emotional well-being, above and beyond other abusive behaviors.
“One of the central issues with gaslighting is the difficulty victims face in identifying and recognizing it as a form of abuse,” Tager-Shafrir told PsyPost. “The fact that it’s challenging for the victim to define their experience as abusive makes it even more painful and damaging. We believe it’s crucial for people to understand and recognize gaslighting so they can identify it in their own experiences and seek help when needed.”
“Our inventory is primarily designed for research purposes and not for clinical diagnosis. However, it can provide the general public with a broad picture of what it means to experience gaslighting, offering insights into the behaviors and patterns associated with this form of abuse.”
Interestingly, the study also found that men reported experiencing more gaslighting than women in both the Israeli and U.S. samples, challenging the common perception that gaslighting primarily affects women. However, the researchers cautioned against drawing definitive conclusions, as this finding may reflect differences in how men and women perceive and report gaslighting behaviors.
“We were surprised to find that men reported experiencing more gaslighting than women in our study,” Tager-Shafrir said. “This unexpected result led us to consider two possibilities. First, it’s possible that in everyday situations, women might use more subtle forms of non-physical aggression. Second, we hypothesized that if we were to conduct this study with a clinical sample, we might see the opposite gender differences.”
The researchers also note that their sample was not representative of all populations. In particular, certain groups, such as people with disabilities or ethnic minorities, were underrepresented. This means that the results may not be fully generalizable to these populations, and future research should aim to include a more diverse range of participants.
Despite these limitations, the GREI represents a significant advancement in the study of gaslighting. Future research could build on this work by examining the long-term effects of gaslighting on mental health and relationship outcomes. Additionally, researchers could explore whether different types of gaslighting—such as mild vs. severe forms—have different impacts on victims.
The Gaslighting Relationship Exposure Inventory (GREI) is intended for research purposes only and is not designed to diagnose or replace professional mental health evaluations or clinical assessments. While the GREI provides insights into gaslighting behaviors within romantic relationships, it should not be used as a definitive measure of abuse or psychological harm.
If you believe you are experiencing emotional manipulation or abuse, it is important to seek support from a qualified mental health professional or counselor. The GREI is not a substitute for professional advice, therapy, or intervention. Individual experiences of gaslighting may vary, and the results of this inventory should be considered alongside a broader understanding of relationship dynamics and emotional health.
The study, “The gaslighting relationship exposure inventory: Reliability and validity in two cultures,” was authored by Tair Tager-Shafrir, Ohad Szepsenwol, Maayan Dvir, and Osnat Zamir
