Olha , foi bom , e o meu ficou com 70% , eu vou fazer denovo pra ter certeza, pq não creio ... Mas é muito bom!
Deenz Antisocial Personality Scale (DAPS-R) Research Statistics
Assessment Information
- Sample Adequacy: Developing dataset with emerging normative stability.
- Research Status: DEVELOPING DATASET
- Items: 24
- Dimensions: 8
- Dataset Maturity: The current dataset achieved a maturity score of 45/100 and is classified as DEVELOPING.
Table 1
Normative Dataset Overview
Descriptive characteristics of the current normative sample.
| Participants | 52 |
| Countries Represented | 8 |
| Dataset Maturity | 45/100 — DevelopingDataset |
| Research Status | DEVELOPING NORMATIVE DATASET |
| Sample Adequacy | Developing dataset with emerging normative stability. |
| Data Collection Period | Jun 5, 2026 – Jun 6, 2026 |
The current normative dataset consists of
52
participants collected from
8
countries.
Table 2
Score Statistics
Measures of central tendency and variability.
| Mean Score | 58.96% |
| Median Score | 61 |
| Standard Deviation | 16.79 |
| Variance | 282 |
| Standard Error (SEM) | 2.33 |
| Reliability (α) | 0.89 |
| Unid | 24 |
| Dimensões | 8 |
The sample demonstrated a mean score of
58.96%
(Mdn = 61,
SD = 16.79).
Table 3
Distribution Characteristics
Distribution shape and score dispersion indicators.
| Observed Score Range | 81 |
| Maximum Observed Score | 97% |
| Minimum Observed Score | 16% |
| 95% Confidence Interval | 54.4– 63.53 |
| Skewness | -0.4 |
| Kurtosis | 0.7 |
Observed skewness
(-0.4)
and kurtosis
(0.7)
provide indicators of distribution quality and normality.
Global Participation Interpretation
The current dataset includes responses from 8countries . The largest contribution currently comes from FR which represents approximately 50% of all participants. International participation enhances sample diversity and improves the generalizability of normative findings across geographic regions.
Normative Percentile Distribution
Normative Interpretation
The current normative dataset indicates that approximately 10% of participants scored below 35%, while 90% scored above this level. The median score was 58%, meaning that half of participants scored below this value and half scored above it. Scores of 68% or greater were achieved by approximately the highest 25% of participants, whereas scores of 76% or greater were achieved by approximately the highest 10% of participants. These percentile values provide preliminary normative benchmarks that can be used to contextualize individual assessment results relative to the current community sample.
Distribution Histogram
Distribution Interpretation
This histogram displays the distribution of participant scores across the assessment. A balanced bell-shaped pattern generally indicates good score dispersion and stronger normative utility, whereas highly skewed distributions may indicate floor effects, ceiling effects, or sample bias.
Distribution Quality
The score distribution demonstrated
a skewness of
-0.4
and a kurtosis of
0.7.
The score distribution appears reasonably balanced and does not currently suggest substantial departures from normality.
Reliability Analysis
GOOD RELIABILITY
The assessment demonstrated good internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.89), suggesting that the assessment items measure a relatively coherent psychological construct.
Item–Total Correlations
Insufficient Sample Size
Item–total correlations are not currently reported because the assessment has fewer than 100 participant responses. Psychometric item analysis requires a larger sample to produce stable and interpretable estimates.
Current Participants: 52
Minimum Recommended: 100
Item–total correlations are not currently reported because the assessment has fewer than 100 participant responses. Psychometric item analysis requires a larger sample to produce stable and interpretable estimates.
Current Participants: 52
Minimum Recommended: 100
Dimension Norms
Dimension Interpretation
The highest scoring dimension in the current sample was Agressividade (71.9%). The lowest scoring dimension was Apatia (46.8%). Dimensions located above the 50% reference line represent characteristics that were more strongly endorsed within the current participant sample. Standard deviations indicate the degree of variability observed across participant responses.
Research Interpretation
This psychometric dataset currently includes 52 anonymous participant responses collected through voluntary participation. The observed mean score was 58.96 with a standard deviation of 16.79, indicating moderate score variability within the sampled population. Internal consistency reliability analysis demonstrated good reliability (Cronbach alpha = 0.89). Observed skewness (-0.4) and kurtosis (0.7) were examined as indicators of distribution quality. The score distribution appeared reasonably balanced and did not suggest substantial departures from normality.
Ethical & Research Notice
All responses included in this dataset are collected anonymously through voluntary participation. No personally identifying information is stored. Results are intended exclusively for educational, psychometric, research, and self-reflective purposes and should not be used as clinical diagnoses. Drdeenz continuously monitors response quality, distribution stability, and internal consistency to support ethical psychometric reporting.
Dataset Export
Research Citation
Deenz Antisocial Personality Scale (DAPS-R). Drdeenz Research Dataset. Retrieved from https://drdeenz.com/pt/pt/sociopath-test/statistics/
Licença: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
Opiniões do público sobre Teste de Sociopatia
As opiniões a seguir foram compartilhadas voluntariamente pelos usuários após a conclusão deste self-assessment. As experiências individuais podem variar e este conteúdo não deve ser interpretado como aconselhamento ou diagnóstico clínico.