Emotional Abuse Test - Have You Been Emotionally Abused Quiz?
Research Dataset
Deenz Emotional Abuse Scale (DEAS)
Normative and Psychometric Statistics
ROBUST
N=621
α=0.919
51Countries
Abstract
Deenz Emotional Abuse Scale (DEAS)
normative dataset currently contains
621
participant records collected between
Jun 11, 2026
and
Oct 15, 2026
.
This psychometric dataset currently includes 621 anonymous participant responses collected through voluntary participation. The observed mean score was 61.8 with a standard deviation of 13.72, indicating moderate score variability within the sampled population. Internal consistency reliability analysis demonstrated excellent reliability (Cronbach alpha = 0.919). Observed skewness (-0.26) and kurtosis (0.55) were examined as indicators of distribution quality. The score distribution appeared reasonably balanced and did not suggest substantial departures from normality.
621
Participants
51
Countries
48
Scale Items
0.919
Reliability
Table 1
Dataset Overview
Assessment
Deenz Emotional Abuse Scale (DEAS)
Research Status
Robust Dataset
Dataset Maturity
90
/100 —
ROBUST
Participants
621
Countries Represented
51
Items
48
Dimensions
6
Data Collection Period
Jun 11, 2026
–
Oct 15, 2026
Reliability
α =
0.919
Note.
The current Deenz Emotional Abuse Scale (DEAS) dataset contains 621 participant records collected from 51 countries. Dataset maturity reflects sample size, geographic diversity, and internal consistency reliability.
Table 2
Descriptive Statistics
Statistic
Value
Mean Score
61.8%
Median Score
63
Standard Deviation
13.72
Variance
188.16
Standard Error
0.55
95% CI Lower
60.72
95% CI Upper
62.88
Minimum Score
10%
Maximum Score
98%
Observed Range
88
Note.
M = 61.8, SD = 13.72, Median = 63. The 95% confidence interval ranged from 60.72 to 62.88.
Table 3
Sample Characteristics
Variable
Summary
Participants
N =
621
Countries
51
Age Information
Available
Gender Information
Available
Note.
Demographic information was collected voluntarily. Participant counts may vary across demographic categories when information was not reported.
Age Distribution
Age Group
Participants
under18
125
25-34
102
18-24
93
35-44
54
45-54
46
prefer_not
20
55plus
17
Gender Distribution
Gender
Participants
Female
279
Male
124
Prefer_not
54
Figure 1
Global Participation
Note.
Participants were represented across 51 countries. The largest contribution originated from US (35.1% of available geographic records).
Country
Participants
Percent
US
218
35.1%
DE
112
18%
GB
64
10.3%
AE
32
5.2%
CA
32
5.2%
FR
21
3.4%
AU
17
2.7%
ES
14
2.3%
NL
7
1.1%
PL
7
1.1%
SE
7
1.1%
IE
7
1.1%
KW
5
0.8%
PH
5
0.8%
AT
5
0.8%
PT
4
0.6%
NO
4
0.6%
EG
4
0.6%
IN
4
0.6%
DK
3
0.5%
ZA
3
0.5%
CH
3
0.5%
BR
3
0.5%
ID
3
0.5%
VN
2
0.3%
SG
2
0.3%
NP
2
0.3%
FI
2
0.3%
GU
2
0.3%
BY
2
0.3%
CZ
2
0.3%
HK
2
0.3%
MA
2
0.3%
HR
2
0.3%
SA
1
0.2%
T1
1
0.2%
NZ
1
0.2%
BE
1
0.2%
TR
1
0.2%
AZ
1
0.2%
LV
1
0.2%
CR
1
0.2%
UY
1
0.2%
RO
1
0.2%
PR
1
0.2%
UA
1
0.2%
AR
1
0.2%
ZM
1
0.2%
BD
1
0.2%
KZ
1
0.2%
EE
1
0.2%
Table 4
Percentile Norms
Percentile
Score
Interpretation
10th
45%
Very Low
25th
53%
Below Average
50th
63%
Average
75th
71%
Above Average
90th
79%
Elevated
Note.
Percentile values provide preliminary normative benchmarks derived from the current Deenz Emotional Abuse Scale (DEAS) sample.
Figure 2
Score Distribution
Note.
Observed scores ranged from 10% to 98% (M = 61.8, SD = 13.72). Distribution characteristics included skewness (-0.26) and kurtosis (0.55).
Distribution indices suggested no substantial departures from normality.
Table 5
Reliability Analysis
Metric
Value
Cronbach Alpha
0.919
Reliability Classification
Excellent
Participants
621
Items
48
Standard Error
0.55
Note.
Internal consistency was estimated using Cronbach alpha. Reliability estimates are based on the current normative dataset and may change as additional responses are collected.
Item–Total Correlations
Item Analysis Interpretation
Item–total correlations were generally strong across the assessment, indicating that most items contribute effectively to the measurement of the underlying construct.
All items demonstrated acceptable or stronger discrimination. No item-level psychometric concerns were identified within the current dataset.
Table 7
Dimension Norms
Dimension
Mean
SD
N
Restraint
65.87%
17.67
621
Distrust
65.8%
17.52
621
Inadequacy
63.48%
16.83
621
Submissiveness
61.52%
18.27
621
Vulnerability
59.68%
15.16
621
Dependency
54.8%
20.78
621
Note.
Dimension statistics summarize normative performance across the major constructs measured by Deenz Emotional Abuse Scale (DEAS).
Figure 5
Dimension Profile
Note.
The highest observed dimension was Restraint (65.9%), whereas the lowest observed dimension was Dependency (54.8%). The observed difference between dimensions was 11.1 percentage points. Moderate variation was observed between dimensions.
Table 8
Dataset Growth Summary
Metric
Value
Current Participants
621
Countries
51
Collection Start
Jun 11, 2026
Collection End
Oct 15, 2026
Months Recorded
5
Note.
Growth statistics summarize cumulative participation throughout the observed data collection period.
Normative Data Notice
A total of
621
participant responses were available for this assessment.
Dimension-level norms were calculated using
621
valid response records.
Approximately
0
response record(s) were excluded from dimension-level normative calculations due to incomplete response patterns.
Limitations
Normative statistics are derived from voluntary participation and may not represent all populations. Reliability estimates, percentile norms, and dimension statistics should be interpreted in the context of the current sample and may change as additional responses are collected.
Ethical Statement
All records included in this dataset were collected anonymously. No personally identifying information is stored. Data are intended for educational, psychometric, and research purposes.
Recommended Citation
Deenz Emotional Abuse Scale (DEAS). Research Dataset. Retrieved from https://drdeenz.com/emotional-abuse-test/statistics/