Ψ Drdeenz_ The Psychometric Tool
☰
🏠 Main Page 📝 Questionnaire
Research Dataset

Kinsey-Style Continuum Scale

Normative and Psychometric Statistics
DEVELOPING N=162 α=0.683 24Countries
Abstract

Kinsey-Style Continuum Scale normative dataset currently contains 162 participant records collected between Jun 9, 2026 and Jun 29, 2026 .

This psychometric dataset currently includes 162 anonymous participant responses collected through voluntary participation. The observed mean score was 56.22 with a standard deviation of 12.67, indicating moderate score variability within the sampled population. Internal consistency reliability analysis produced a Cronbach alpha of 0.683, which falls below commonly accepted psychometric standards and should be interpreted cautiously until additional data are collected. Observed skewness (-0.85) and kurtosis (1.43) were examined as indicators of distribution quality. The score distribution appeared reasonably balanced and did not suggest substantial departures from normality.

162
Participants
24
Countries
20
Items
0.683
Reliability
Table 1
Dataset Overview
Assessment Kinsey-Style Continuum Scale
Research Status Established Dataset
Dataset Maturity 50 /100 — DEVELOPING
Participants 162
Countries Represented 24
Items 20
Dimensions 11
Data Collection Period Jun 9, 2026 – Jun 29, 2026
Reliability α = 0.683
Note. The current Kinsey-Style Continuum Scale dataset contains 162 participant records collected from 24 countries. Dataset maturity reflects sample size, geographic diversity, and internal consistency reliability.
Table 2
Descriptive Statistics
Statistic Value
Mean Score 56.22%
Median Score 56
Standard Deviation 12.67
Variance 160.65
Standard Error 1
95% CI Lower 54.27
95% CI Upper 58.17
Minimum Score 9%
Maximum Score 81%
Observed Range 72
Note. M = 56.22, SD = 12.67, Median = 56. The 95% confidence interval ranged from 54.27 to 58.17.
Table 3
Sample Characteristics
Variable Summary
Participants N = 162
Countries 24
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 24 countries. The largest contribution originated from DE (31.5% of available geographic records).
Table 4
Percentile Norms
Percentile Score Interpretation
10th 41% Very Low
25th 49% Below Average
50th 56% Average
75th 65% Above Average
90th 71% Elevated
Note. Percentile values provide preliminary normative benchmarks derived from the current Kinsey-Style Continuum Scale sample.
Figure 2
Score Distribution
Note. Observed scores ranged from 9% to 81% (M = 56.22, SD = 12.67). Distribution characteristics included skewness (-0.85) and kurtosis (1.43). Distribution indices suggested no substantial departures from normality.
Table 5
Reliability Analysis
Metric Value
Cronbach Alpha 0.683
Reliability Classification Questionable
Participants 162
Items 20
Standard Error 1
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 Q40 0.78 Excellent Q48 0.78 Excellent Q22 0.76 Excellent Q41 0.74 Excellent Q38 0.68 Excellent Q11 0.61 Excellent Q32 0.61 Excellent Q47 0.59 Excellent Q27 0.54 Excellent Q12 0.52 Excellent Q18 0.52 Excellent Q17 0.51 Excellent Q33 0.47 Acceptable Q21 0.45 Acceptable Q13 0.44 Acceptable Q45 0.44 Acceptable Q3 0.42 Acceptable Q44 0.39 Acceptable Q7 0.38 Acceptable Q39 0.36 Acceptable Q25 0.35 Acceptable Q37 0.34 Acceptable Q46 0.3 Acceptable Q43 0.3 Weak Q5 0.27 Weak Q42 0.27 Weak Q6 0.26 Weak Q16 0.23 Weak Q24 0.23 Weak Q4 0.22 Weak Q1 0.2 Weak Q19 0.2 Weak Q10 0.19 Problematic Q2 0.18 Problematic Q9 0.15 Problematic Q34 0.08 Problematic Q26 0.06 Problematic Q15 0.05 Problematic Q14 0.02 Problematic Q20 0.01 Problematic Q8 -0.01 Problematic Q28 -0.03 Problematic Q36 -0.04 Problematic Q35 -0.08 Problematic Q30 -0.14 Problematic Q31 -0.29 Problematic Q49 -0.31 Problematic Q23 -0.43 Problematic Q29 -0.45 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 identified26 itemsthat may benefit from future review.

Items Recommended for Future Review
  • Q1 (r = 0.2)
    I often develop romantic feelings toward people of the same sex.
  • Q2 (r = 0.18)
    I often develop romantic feelings toward people of the opposite sex.
  • Q4 (r = 0.22)
    I experience physical attraction toward people of the opposite sex.
  • Q5 (r = 0.27)
    I can imagine myself in a long-term relationship with someone of the same sex.
  • Q6 (r = 0.26)
    I can imagine myself in a long-term relationship with someone of the opposite sex.
  • Q8 (r = -0.01)
    My fantasies frequently involve people of the opposite sex.
  • Q9 (r = 0.15)
    I feel emotionally closer to people of the same sex.
  • Q10 (r = 0.19)
    I feel emotionally closer to people of the opposite sex.
  • Q14 (r = 0.02)
    I rarely experience strong physical attraction toward anyone.
  • Q15 (r = 0.05)
    Emotional connection is more important to me than physical attraction.
  • Q16 (r = 0.23)
    I feel uncertain about how to define my orientation.
  • Q19 (r = 0.2)
    I feel comfortable discussing my attraction patterns openly.
  • Q20 (r = 0.01)
    I feel stress or confusion related to my attraction patterns.
  • Q23 (r = -0.43)
  • Q24 (r = 0.23)
  • Q26 (r = 0.06)
  • Q28 (r = -0.03)
  • Q29 (r = -0.45)
  • Q30 (r = -0.14)
  • Q31 (r = -0.29)
  • Q34 (r = 0.08)
  • Q35 (r = -0.08)
  • Q36 (r = -0.04)
  • Q42 (r = 0.27)
  • Q43 (r = 0.3)
  • Q49 (r = -0.31)
The lowest item–total correlation was observed for Q29 ("Question text unavailable"; r = -0.45), indicating comparatively weaker alignment with the overall construct.
Table 7
Dimension Norms
Dimension Mean SD N
Orientation Exploration 75.39% 18.97 51
Orientation Fluidity 71.75% 25.08 51
Relationship Orientation 66.12% 24.33 51
Opposite-Sex Attraction 65.59% 23.47 51
Emotional Orientation 61.96% 23.59 51
Fantasy Patterns 61.53% 18.5 51
Same-Sex Attraction 60.76% 22.04 51
Emotional Bonding 53.8% 16.66 51
Self-Acceptance 37.75% 28.45 51
Asexual Traits 34.31% 29.56 51
Identity Conflict 6.86% 21.26 51
Note. Dimension statistics summarize normative performance across the major constructs measured by Kinsey-Style Continuum Scale.
Figure 5
Dimension Profile
Note. The highest observed dimension was Orientation Exploration (75.4%), whereas the lowest observed dimension was Identity Conflict (6.9%). The observed difference between dimensions was 68.5 percentage points. Substantial variation was observed between dimensions.
Table 8
Dataset Growth Summary
Metric Value
Current Participants 162
Countries 24
Collection Start Jun 9, 2026
Collection End Jun 29, 2026
Months Recorded 1
Note. Growth statistics summarize cumulative participation throughout the observed data collection period.
Normative Data Notice

A total of 162 participant responses were available for this assessment. Dimension-level norms were calculated using 51 valid response records. Approximately 111 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

Kinsey-Style Continuum Scale. Research Dataset. Retrieved from https://drdeenz.com/kinsey-scale-test/statistics/

Dataset Export

Download CSV Dataset