Extreme Demand Avoidance Questionnaire (EDAQ)
normative dataset currently contains
200
participant records collected between
Jun 12, 2026
and
Oct 30, 2026
.
This psychometric dataset currently includes 200 anonymous participant responses collected through voluntary participation. The observed mean score was 48.61 with a standard deviation of 17.34, indicating moderate score variability within the sampled population. Internal consistency reliability analysis demonstrated excellent reliability (Cronbach alpha = 0.904). Observed skewness (0.03) and kurtosis (-0.32) were examined as indicators of distribution quality. The score distribution appeared reasonably balanced and did not suggest substantial departures from normality.
200
Participants
35
Countries
24
Scale Items
0.904
Reliability
Table 1
Dataset Overview
Assessment
Extreme Demand Avoidance Questionnaire (EDAQ)
Research Status
Established Dataset
Dataset Maturity
70
/100 —
STRONG
Participants
200
Countries Represented
35
Items
24
Dimensions
6
Data Collection Period
Jun 12, 2026
–
Oct 30, 2026
Reliability
α =
0.904
Note.
The current Extreme Demand Avoidance Questionnaire (EDAQ) dataset contains 200 participant records collected from 35 countries. Dataset maturity reflects sample size, geographic diversity, and internal consistency reliability.
Table 2
Descriptive Statistics
Statistic
Value
Mean Score
48.61%
Median Score
48
Standard Deviation
17.34
Variance
300.64
Standard Error
1.23
95% CI Lower
46.2
95% CI Upper
51.01
Minimum Score
0%
Maximum Score
89%
Observed Range
89
Note.
M = 48.61, SD = 17.34, Median = 48. The 95% confidence interval ranged from 46.2 to 51.01.
Table 3
Sample Characteristics
Variable
Summary
Participants
N =
200
Countries
35
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
25-34
48
under18
46
18-24
36
35-44
22
45-54
16
prefer_not
6
55plus
5
Gender Distribution
Gender
Participants
Female
100
Male
68
Prefer_not
11
Figure 1
Global Participation
Note.
Participants were represented across 35 countries. The largest contribution originated from DE (15.5% of available geographic records).
Country
Participants
Percent
DE
31
15.5%
US
23
11.5%
NL
16
8%
FR
15
7.5%
RU
13
6.5%
GB
12
6%
ES
9
4.5%
KZ
7
3.5%
CH
6
3%
LV
6
3%
FI
6
3%
IN
5
2.5%
UA
5
2.5%
SE
5
2.5%
CA
5
2.5%
BY
4
2%
AT
3
1.5%
ID
3
1.5%
MX
3
1.5%
LT
3
1.5%
BR
3
1.5%
RS
2
1%
PL
2
1%
NZ
2
1%
RE
1
0.5%
AR
1
0.5%
CR
1
0.5%
SI
1
0.5%
NO
1
0.5%
ME
1
0.5%
IT
1
0.5%
RO
1
0.5%
AU
1
0.5%
SV
1
0.5%
PT
1
0.5%
Table 4
Percentile Norms
Percentile
Score
Interpretation
10th
26%
Very Low
25th
36%
Below Average
50th
47%
Average
75th
61%
Above Average
90th
69%
Elevated
Note.
Percentile values provide preliminary normative benchmarks derived from the current Extreme Demand Avoidance Questionnaire (EDAQ) sample.
Figure 2
Score Distribution
Note.
Observed scores ranged from 0% to 89% (M = 48.61, SD = 17.34). Distribution characteristics included skewness (0.03) and kurtosis (-0.32).
Distribution indices suggested no substantial departures from normality.
Table 5
Reliability Analysis
Metric
Value
Cronbach Alpha
0.904
Reliability Classification
Excellent
Participants
200
Items
24
Standard Error
1.23
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.
The analysis identified1
itemthat may benefit from future review.
Items Recommended for Future Review
Q24
(r = 0.01)
I get lost in my imagination when I should be working.
The lowest item–total correlation was observed for Q24 ("I get lost in my imagination when I should be working."; r = 0.01), indicating comparatively weaker alignment with the overall construct.
Table 7
Dimension Norms
Dimension
Mean
SD
N
Control
65.27%
23.22
200
Anxiety
59.16%
26.37
200
Reactivity
48.35%
27.42
200
Resistance
46.56%
21.69
200
Social Influence
41.62%
21.38
200
Imagination
35.91%
17.03
200
Note.
Dimension statistics summarize normative performance across the major constructs measured by Extreme Demand Avoidance Questionnaire (EDAQ).
Figure 5
Dimension Profile
Note.
The highest observed dimension was Control (65.3%), whereas the lowest observed dimension was Imagination (35.9%). The observed difference between dimensions was 29.4 percentage points. Substantial variation was observed between dimensions.
Table 8
Dataset Growth Summary
Metric
Value
Current Participants
200
Countries
35
Collection Start
Jun 12, 2026
Collection End
Oct 30, 2026
Months Recorded
5
Note.
Growth statistics summarize cumulative participation throughout the observed data collection period.
Normative Data Notice
A total of
200
participant responses were available for this assessment.
Dimension-level norms were calculated using
200
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
Extreme Demand Avoidance Questionnaire (EDAQ). Research Dataset. Retrieved from https://drdeenz.com/pathological-demand-avoidance-test/statistics/