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

Moral Alignment Questionnaire (MAQ-27)

Normative and Psychometric Statistics
STRONG N=890 α=0.751 49Countries
Abstract

Moral Alignment Questionnaire (MAQ-27) normative dataset currently contains 890 participant records collected between Jun 9, 2026 and Jul 6, 2026 .

This psychometric dataset currently includes 890 anonymous participant responses collected through voluntary participation. The observed mean score was 58.64 with a standard deviation of 10.15, indicating moderate score variability within the sampled population. Internal consistency reliability analysis demonstrated acceptable reliability (Cronbach alpha = 0.751). Observed skewness (-2.07) and kurtosis (6.92) were examined as indicators of distribution quality. The current score distribution exhibited notable departures from normality and should be interpreted cautiously until additional normative data are collected.

890
Participants
49
Countries
27
Items
0.751
Reliability
Table 1
Dataset Overview
Assessment Moral Alignment Questionnaire (MAQ-27)
Research Status Robust Dataset
Dataset Maturity 80 /100 — STRONG
Participants 890
Countries Represented 49
Items 27
Dimensions 9
Data Collection Period Jun 9, 2026 – Jul 6, 2026
Reliability α = 0.751
Note. The current Moral Alignment Questionnaire (MAQ-27) dataset contains 890 participant records collected from 49 countries. Dataset maturity reflects sample size, geographic diversity, and internal consistency reliability.
Table 2
Descriptive Statistics
Statistic Value
Mean Score 58.64%
Median Score 60
Standard Deviation 10.15
Variance 103.07
Standard Error 0.34
95% CI Lower 57.98
95% CI Upper 59.31
Minimum Score 0%
Maximum Score 80%
Observed Range 80
Note. M = 58.64, SD = 10.15, Median = 60. The 95% confidence interval ranged from 57.98 to 59.31.
Table 3
Sample Characteristics
Variable Summary
Participants N = 890
Countries 49
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 49 countries. The largest contribution originated from US (39.4% of available geographic records).
Table 4
Percentile Norms
Percentile Score Interpretation
10th 48% Very Low
25th 56% Below Average
50th 60% Average
75th 66% Above Average
90th 68% Elevated
Note. Percentile values provide preliminary normative benchmarks derived from the current Moral Alignment Questionnaire (MAQ-27) sample.
Figure 2
Score Distribution
Note. Observed scores ranged from 0% to 80% (M = 58.64, SD = 10.15). Distribution characteristics included skewness (-2.07) and kurtosis (6.92). Distribution indices suggested notable departures from normality and should be interpreted cautiously.
Table 5
Reliability Analysis
Metric Value
Cronbach Alpha 0.751
Reliability Classification Acceptable
Participants 890
Items 27
Standard Error 0.34
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 Q14 0.57 Excellent Q7 0.52 Excellent Q9 0.52 Excellent Q8 0.51 Excellent Q11 0.44 Acceptable Q16 0.43 Acceptable Q18 0.41 Acceptable Q10 0.41 Acceptable Q20 0.4 Acceptable Q25 0.37 Acceptable Q6 0.36 Acceptable Q4 0.33 Acceptable Q5 0.33 Acceptable Q1 0.32 Acceptable Q26 0.32 Acceptable Q2 0.28 Weak Q3 0.26 Weak Q15 0.21 Weak Q17 0.16 Problematic Q23 0.14 Problematic Q22 0.14 Problematic Q13 0.09 Problematic Q27 0.09 Problematic Q12 0.08 Problematic Q24 -0.02 Problematic Q21 -0.03 Problematic Q19 -0.14 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 identified12 itemsthat may benefit from future review.

Items Recommended for Future Review
  • Q2 (r = 0.28)
    I try to help others even when it is inconvenient.
  • Q3 (r = 0.26)
    Doing the right thing matters more than personal gain.
  • Q12 (r = 0.08)
    Duty is more important than personal feelings.
  • Q13 (r = 0.09)
    I avoid taking extreme positions.
  • Q15 (r = 0.21)
    Maintaining balance is important to me.
  • Q17 (r = 0.16)
    I act spontaneously rather than planning carefully.
  • Q19 (r = -0.14)
    Strict authority is necessary even if people suffer.
  • Q21 (r = -0.03)
    I value efficiency more than compassion.
  • Q22 (r = 0.14)
    I mainly focus on protecting my own interests.
  • Q23 (r = 0.14)
    I would manipulate someone if it helped me succeed.
  • Q24 (r = -0.02)
    Morality is less important than personal advantage.
  • Q27 (r = 0.09)
    I act on impulse without considering consequences.
The lowest item–total correlation was observed for Q19 ("Strict authority is necessary even if people suffer."; r = -0.14), indicating comparatively weaker alignment with the overall construct.
Table 7
Dimension Norms
Dimension Mean SD N
Chaotic Good 77.42% 22.2 855
Chaotic Neutral 70.29% 19.23 855
Lawful Good 66.29% 19.78 693
Neutral Good 65.5% 24.94 855
True Neutral 62.21% 19.81 855
Lawful Neutral 54.36% 26.99 855
Neutral Evil 46.84% 23.68 855
Lawful Evil 46.63% 22.17 855
Chaotic Evil 44.31% 21.26 855
Note. Dimension statistics summarize normative performance across the major constructs measured by Moral Alignment Questionnaire (MAQ-27).
Figure 5
Dimension Profile
Note. The highest observed dimension was Chaotic Good (77.4%), whereas the lowest observed dimension was Chaotic Evil (44.3%). The observed difference between dimensions was 33.1 percentage points. Substantial variation was observed between dimensions.
Table 8
Dataset Growth Summary
Metric Value
Current Participants 890
Countries 49
Collection Start Jun 9, 2026
Collection End Jul 6, 2026
Months Recorded 2
Note. Growth statistics summarize cumulative participation throughout the observed data collection period.
Normative Data Notice

A total of 890 participant responses were available for this assessment. Dimension-level norms were calculated using 855 valid response records. Approximately 35 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

Moral Alignment Questionnaire (MAQ-27). Research Dataset. Retrieved from https://drdeenz.com/moral-alignment-test/statistics/

Dataset Export

Download CSV Dataset