Drdeenz_ The Psychometric Tool

Misophonia Test – Deenz Misophonia Questionnaire – Revised (DMQ-R)

Research Dataset

Deenz Misophonia Questionnaire – Revised (DMQ-R)

Normative and Psychometric Statistics
STRONG N=206 α=0.966 10Countries
Abstract

Deenz Misophonia Questionnaire – Revised (DMQ-R) normative dataset currently contains 206 participant records collected between Jun 20, 2026 and Jul 12, 2026 .

This psychometric dataset currently includes 206 anonymous participant responses collected through voluntary participation. The observed mean score was 44.09 with a standard deviation of 18.08, indicating moderate score variability within the sampled population. Internal consistency reliability analysis demonstrated excellent reliability (Cronbach alpha = 0.966). Observed skewness (-0.55) and kurtosis (0.83) were examined as indicators of distribution quality. The score distribution appeared reasonably balanced and did not suggest substantial departures from normality.

206
Participants
10
Countries
71
Scale Items
0.966
Reliability
Table 1
Dataset Overview
Assessment Deenz Misophonia Questionnaire – Revised (DMQ-R)
Research Status Established Dataset
Dataset Maturity 65 /100 — STRONG
Participants 206
Countries Represented 10
Items 71
Dimensions 7
Data Collection Period Jun 20, 2026 – Jul 12, 2026
Reliability α = 0.966
Note. The current Deenz Misophonia Questionnaire – Revised (DMQ-R) dataset contains 206 participant records collected from 10 countries. Dataset maturity reflects sample size, geographic diversity, and internal consistency reliability.
Table 2
Descriptive Statistics
Statistic Value
Mean Score 44.09%
Median Score 47.5
Standard Deviation 18.08
Variance 326.83
Standard Error 1.26
95% CI Lower 41.62
95% CI Upper 46.56
Minimum Score 0%
Maximum Score 86%
Observed Range 86
Note. M = 44.09, SD = 18.08, Median = 47.5. The 95% confidence interval ranged from 41.62 to 46.56.
Table 3
Sample Characteristics
Variable Summary
Participants N = 206
Countries 10
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 10 countries. The largest contribution originated from IN (72.3% of available geographic records).
Table 4
Percentile Norms
Percentile Score Interpretation
10th 23% Very Low
25th 38% Below Average
50th 47% Average
75th 54% Above Average
90th 62% Elevated
Note. Percentile values provide preliminary normative benchmarks derived from the current Deenz Misophonia Questionnaire – Revised (DMQ-R) sample.
Figure 2
Score Distribution
Note. Observed scores ranged from 0% to 86% (M = 44.09, SD = 18.08). Distribution characteristics included skewness (-0.55) and kurtosis (0.83). Distribution indices suggested no substantial departures from normality.
Table 5
Reliability Analysis
Metric Value
Cronbach Alpha 0.966
Reliability Classification Excellent
Participants 206
Items 71
Standard Error 1.26
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 Q124 0.72 Excellent Q126 0.71 Excellent Q127 0.71 Excellent Q114 0.71 Excellent Q125 0.7 Excellent Q119 0.7 Excellent Q101 0.7 Excellent Q116 0.7 Excellent Q117 0.69 Excellent Q123 0.69 Excellent Q98 0.69 Excellent Q99 0.69 Excellent Q115 0.68 Excellent Q118 0.68 Excellent Q121 0.66 Excellent Q103 0.65 Excellent Q137 0.65 Excellent Q128 0.65 Excellent Q96 0.64 Excellent Q149 0.62 Excellent Q129 0.62 Excellent Q135 0.62 Excellent Q138 0.62 Excellent Q136 0.61 Excellent Q148 0.6 Excellent Q97 0.6 Excellent Q110 0.6 Excellent Q100 0.6 Excellent Q120 0.6 Excellent Q134 0.6 Excellent Q150 0.6 Excellent Q141 0.59 Excellent Q109 0.59 Excellent Q102 0.59 Excellent Q94 0.59 Excellent Q147 0.58 Excellent Q112 0.58 Excellent Q144 0.58 Excellent Q108 0.58 Excellent Q142 0.58 Excellent Q95 0.57 Excellent Q133 0.57 Excellent Q146 0.57 Excellent Q130 0.57 Excellent Q140 0.57 Excellent Q143 0.57 Excellent Q111 0.57 Excellent Q151 0.56 Excellent Q145 0.56 Excellent Q107 0.55 Excellent Q131 0.55 Excellent Q139 0.55 Excellent Q152 0.54 Excellent Q132 0.53 Excellent Q122 0.5 Excellent Q106 0.46 Acceptable Q105 0.42 Acceptable Q113 0.4 Acceptable Q91 0.38 Acceptable Q89 0.34 Acceptable Q88 0.34 Acceptable Q93 0.33 Acceptable Q90 0.3 Acceptable Q104 0.29 Weak Q92 0.25 Weak Q86 0.2 Weak Q85 0.17 Problematic Q87 0.15 Problematic Q84 0.09 Problematic Q82 0.05 Problematic Q83 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 identified8 itemsthat may benefit from future review.

Items Recommended for Future Review
  • Q82 (r = 0.05)
    I felt angry.
  • Q83 (r = 0.01)
    I felt irritated.
  • Q84 (r = 0.09)
    I felt frustrated.
  • Q85 (r = 0.17)
    I felt anxious.
  • Q86 (r = 0.2)
    I felt disgusted.
  • Q87 (r = 0.15)
    I felt overwhelmed.
  • Q92 (r = 0.25)
    I felt emotionally exhausted.
  • Q104 (r = 0.29)
    I could not focus on anything else.
The lowest item–total correlation was observed for Q83 ("I felt irritated."; r = 0.01), indicating comparatively weaker alignment with the overall construct.
Table 7
Dimension Norms
Dimension Mean SD N
Avoidance Strategies 56.03% 26.35 206
Cognitive Reactions 55.18% 27.99 206
Physiological Reactions 53.92% 26.56 206
Functional Impairment 51.86% 27.17 206
Self-Perception 49.67% 32.74 193
Emotional Reactions 36.38% 29.39 206
Trigger Sensitivity 22.99% 31.53 206
Note. Dimension statistics summarize normative performance across the major constructs measured by Deenz Misophonia Questionnaire – Revised (DMQ-R).
Figure 5
Dimension Profile
Note. The highest observed dimension was Avoidance Strategies (56%), whereas the lowest observed dimension was Trigger Sensitivity (23%). The observed difference between dimensions was 33 percentage points. Substantial variation was observed between dimensions.
Table 8
Dataset Growth Summary
Metric Value
Current Participants 206
Countries 10
Collection Start Jun 20, 2026
Collection End Jul 12, 2026
Months Recorded 2
Note. Growth statistics summarize cumulative participation throughout the observed data collection period.
Normative Data Notice

A total of 206 participant responses were available for this assessment. Dimension-level norms were calculated using 206 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 Misophonia Questionnaire – Revised (DMQ-R). Research Dataset. Retrieved from https://drdeenz.com/misophonia-test/statistics/

Dataset Export

Download CSV Dataset