Drdeenz_ The Psychometric Tool

Gender Dysphoria Test

Research Dataset

Deenz Gender Dysphoria Scale (DGDS)

Normative and Psychometric Statistics
STRONG N=1258 α=0.6 69Countries
Abstract

Deenz Gender Dysphoria Scale (DGDS) normative dataset currently contains 1258 participant records collected between Jun 11, 2026 and Sep 8, 2026 .

This psychometric dataset currently includes 1258 anonymous participant responses collected through voluntary participation. The observed mean score was 50.78 with a standard deviation of 10.06, indicating moderate score variability within the sampled population. Internal consistency reliability analysis produced a Cronbach alpha of 0.6, which falls below commonly accepted psychometric standards and should be interpreted cautiously until additional data are collected. Observed skewness (-0.48) and kurtosis (0.77) were examined as indicators of distribution quality. The score distribution appeared reasonably balanced and did not suggest substantial departures from normality.

1258
Participants
69
Countries
25
Scale Items
0.6
Reliability
Table 1
Dataset Overview
Assessment Deenz Gender Dysphoria Scale (DGDS)
Research Status Robust Dataset
Dataset Maturity 80 /100 — STRONG
Participants 1258
Countries Represented 69
Items 25
Dimensions 5
Data Collection Period Jun 11, 2026 – Sep 8, 2026
Reliability α = 0.6
Note. The current Deenz Gender Dysphoria Scale (DGDS) dataset contains 1258 participant records collected from 69 countries. Dataset maturity reflects sample size, geographic diversity, and internal consistency reliability.
Table 2
Descriptive Statistics
Statistic Value
Mean Score 50.78%
Median Score 51
Standard Deviation 10.06
Variance 101.19
Standard Error 0.28
95% CI Lower 50.23
95% CI Upper 51.34
Minimum Score 15%
Maximum Score 83%
Observed Range 68
Note. M = 50.78, SD = 10.06, Median = 51. The 95% confidence interval ranged from 50.23 to 51.34.
Table 3
Sample Characteristics
Variable Summary
Participants N = 1258
Countries 69
Age Information Available
Gender Information Available
Note. Demographic information was collected voluntarily. Participant counts may vary across demographic categories when information was not reported.
Figure 1
Global Participation
Note. Participants were represented across 69 countries. The largest contribution originated from US (14.3% of available geographic records).
Table 4
Percentile Norms
Percentile Score Interpretation
10th 38% Very Low
25th 46% Below Average
50th 51% Average
75th 57% Above Average
90th 63% Elevated
Note. Percentile values provide preliminary normative benchmarks derived from the current Deenz Gender Dysphoria Scale (DGDS) sample.
Figure 2
Score Distribution
Note. Observed scores ranged from 15% to 83% (M = 50.78, SD = 10.06). Distribution characteristics included skewness (-0.48) and kurtosis (0.77). Distribution indices suggested no substantial departures from normality.
Table 5
Reliability Analysis
Metric Value
Cronbach Alpha 0.6
Reliability Classification Questionable
Participants 1258
Items 25
Standard Error 0.28
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 Item Quality r Rating Q9 0.32 Acceptable Q5 0.31 Acceptable Q11 0.3 Acceptable Q17 0.28 Weak Q22 0.27 Weak Q7 0.25 Weak Q12 0.24 Weak Q13 0.24 Weak Q6 0.23 Weak Q21 0.22 Weak Q20 0.21 Weak Q3 0.2 Weak Q10 0.2 Problematic Q15 0.19 Problematic Q2 0.18 Problematic Q4 0.17 Problematic Q19 0.16 Problematic Q16 0.16 Problematic Q14 0.14 Problematic Q23 0.14 Problematic Q25 0.13 Problematic Q1 0.09 Problematic Q18 0.04 Problematic Q8 0.02 Problematic Q24 -0.01 Problematic
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. The analysis identified22 itemsthat may benefit from future review.

Items Recommended for Future Review
  • Q1 (r = 0.09)
    Sometimes I wish my body looked different.
  • Q2 (r = 0.18)
    I feel happy with the way I look.
  • Q3 (r = 0.2)
    I like trying clothes or hairstyles that feel fun to me.
  • Q4 (r = 0.17)
    I feel okay in the clothes I usually wear.
  • Q6 (r = 0.23)
    I like dressing in ways that show who I am.
  • Q7 (r = 0.25)
    I enjoy mixing different styles or accessories.
  • Q8 (r = 0.02)
    I usually wear what people expect me to wear.
  • Q10 (r = 0.2)
    I feel fine with the way I usually dress.
  • Q12 (r = 0.24)
    I feel comfortable with friends who are different from me.
  • Q13 (r = 0.24)
    Sometimes I enjoy activities with people of a different gender than me.
  • Q14 (r = 0.14)
    I don’t worry about whether games or activities are for boys or girls.
  • Q15 (r = 0.19)
    I feel happy when I talk or play with friends.
  • Q16 (r = 0.16)
    Sometimes I dream about being someone else.
  • Q17 (r = 0.28)
    I feel good being myself.
  • Q18 (r = 0.04)
    If someone calls me by a different name or pronoun, it feels strange.
  • Q19 (r = 0.16)
    I feel fine being called by my usual name or pronoun.
  • Q20 (r = 0.21)
    I sometimes imagine myself in a different role or character.
  • Q21 (r = 0.22)
    Sometimes I feel different from others around me.
  • Q22 (r = 0.27)
    I feel proud of who I am.
  • Q23 (r = 0.14)
    I sometimes feel unsure about what I like or enjoy.
  • Q24 (r = -0.01)
    I feel happy when people listen to me or are kind.
  • Q25 (r = 0.13)
    I feel sad when people don’t understand me.
The lowest item–total correlation was observed for Q24 ("I feel happy when people listen to me or are kind."; r = -0.01), indicating comparatively weaker alignment with the overall construct.
Table 7
Dimension Norms
Dimension Mean SD N
Body Feelings 70.61% 23.45 1258
Emotional Discomfort 62.96% 15.92 1258
Expression Preference 48.13% 12.11 1258
Identity & Self-Acceptance 46.01% 20.02 1258
Social Alignment 40.07% 15.29 1258
Note. Dimension statistics summarize normative performance across the major constructs measured by Deenz Gender Dysphoria Scale (DGDS).
Figure 5
Dimension Profile
Note. The highest observed dimension was Body Feelings (70.6%), whereas the lowest observed dimension was Social Alignment (40.1%). The observed difference between dimensions was 30.5 percentage points. Substantial variation was observed between dimensions.
Table 8
Dataset Growth Summary
Metric Value
Current Participants 1258
Countries 69
Collection Start Jun 11, 2026
Collection End Sep 8, 2026
Months Recorded 4
Note. Growth statistics summarize cumulative participation throughout the observed data collection period.
Normative Data Notice

A total of 1258 participant responses were available for this assessment. Dimension-level norms were calculated using 1258 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 Gender Dysphoria Scale (DGDS). Research Dataset. Retrieved from https://drdeenz.com/gender-dysphoria-test/statistics/

Dataset Export

Download CSV Dataset

PDF