Dehumanizing Deindividuation in Couples (DDC) Scale

Abstract

The Dehumanizing Deindividuation in Couples (DDC) Scale (Brock & Gervais, 2025) is a specialized psychological instrument designed to quantify the degree of dehumanizing deindividuation experienced within intimate relationships. This concept assesses a critical manifestation of dehumanization characterized by a partner’s systematic disregard and contempt for the unique identity and individuality of the other.

The scale’s development was based on items derived from the Individuality in Couples Questionnaire (ICQ; Brock et al., 2023). Initial testing resulted in a refined 11-item, single-factor model reflecting dehumanizing disregard. The final iteration consists of 10 items, structured into parallel versions to assess both received DDC (experienced from the partner) and enacted DDC (directed toward the partner). Psychometric evaluation across undergraduate and community samples demonstrated excellent global model fit and robust evidence supporting its reliability and validity.

Keywords

Couples, Dehumanization, Deindividuation, Intimate Relationships, Relationship Quality, Incremental Validity, Contempt, Disregard

Authors

Brock, Rebecca L., Gervais, Sarah J.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the DDC Scale is to evaluate the extent of dehumanization within intimate relationships. It serves to specifically measure behaviors indicative of dehumanizing deindividuation, focusing on how partners communicate disregard and undermine each other’s sense of self and autonomy.

By providing distinct “received” and “enacted” versions, the DDC Scale allows for a nuanced assessment of dyadic relationship pathology. This structure is essential for researchers and clinicians seeking to understand the bidirectional nature of contemptuous and disregarding behaviors within a couple.

Construct

The scale measures Dehumanizing Deindividuation in Couples. This construct refers to behaviors that convey a partner’s lack of respect, contempt, and the failure to recognize the partner as a unique individual. The items capture specific instances of interactional contempt and disregard, such as acting superior, ignoring, talking over, or treating the partner immaturely.

The DDC scale specifically isolates the negative, destructive elements of individuality suppression derived from earlier work on the ICQ. The final 10 items successfully model a single latent factor that represents this core experience of dehumanizing deindividuation, which is closely linked to poor relationship outcomes.

Validity

The DDC Scale demonstrated comprehensive validity evidence, affirming its capacity to measure the intended construct and predict relevant outcomes.

Convergent Validity: Dyadic DDC scores showed significant correlations with comparable measures. A negative correlation was found with Nonphysical Valuation (NPV; Meltzer & McNulty, 2014) (r = −.31), indicating that greater dehumanizing deindividuation is associated with lower nonphysical appreciation of the partner. A significant, moderate-to-large positive correlation (r = .59) was observed with the Dehumanization in Romantic Relationship Scale (DIRRS), confirming that the DDC measures a related form of relationship dehumanization.

Discriminant Validity: The DDC scores were strongly, inversely correlated with Individuality in Couples Questionnaire (ICQ) scores (e.g., received DDC correlation with ICQ scores was −.70 in Sample 2). Crucially, these correlations remained below the threshold for poor discriminant validity (r < .80), confirming that while related to individuation, the DDC measures a distinct, non-redundant construct.

Incremental Validity: Path analyses established the DDC’s predictive power over and above existing measures (NPV and DIRRS). The DDC was uniquely associated with lower global relationship satisfaction, greater perpetration of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV), and increased IPV victimization. This highlights the DDC’s capacity to uniquely predict severe relationship dysfunction and violence risk.

Reliability

The reliability of the DDC Scale, specifically its Internal Consistency, was robustly established for the final 10-item version across both samples.

The internal consistency statistics reported are: McDonald’s ω = .88, average interitem correlation (AIC) = .436, and Cronbach’s α = .88. These high reliability coefficients confirm that the scale items are highly interrelated and consistently measure the latent construct of dehumanizing deindividuation.

Factor Analysis

The scale’s factor structure was rigorously tested using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to ensure the items reflected a single underlying factor.

Initial CFA results indicated poor global model fit (CFI = .86, RMSEA = .095, SRMR = .059). Based on residual covariances, one item concerning being interrupted was removed due to redundancy, while the item “My partner talked over me” was retained due to its larger factor loading (.60) and more active behavioral definition. The revised 10-item model achieved an excellent global fit (CFI = .96, RMSEA = .053, SRMR = .042), with all factor loadings being significant and salient (ranging from .60 to .74).

Instrument

Test Type: Original

Format: The instrument is a 5-point Rating Scale where participants rate statements based on interactions over the past month (1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree). Administration Method: Electronic.

Language Available: English

Population Group: Human, Male, Female, Transgender

Age Group: The scale is suitable for a wide demographic range, including Adolescence (13-17 yrs), Adulthood (18 yrs & older), Young Adulthood (18-29 yrs), Thirties (30-39 yrs), Middle Age (40-64 yrs), and Aged (65 yrs & older).

Population Details: The validation samples consisted of undergraduates and community members in intimate relationships located in the United States. The samples included diverse gender identities (Female/Male, Male/Man, Genderqueer/Gender Nonconforming/Nonbinary, Transgender Man, Transgender Women) and sexual orientations (Heterosexual/Straight, Bisexual, Lesbian, Pansexual, Gay, Queer, Asexual).

Test Methodology: Test Validity, Construct Validity, Convergent Validity, Criterion Validity, Discriminant Validity, Test Reliability, Internal Consistency, Factor Analysis, Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Keywords

Couples, Deindividuation, Intimate Partner Violence (IPV), Relationship Satisfaction, Psychometrics, Test Forms, Marriage and Partner Measures

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Brock, Rebecca L.: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7826-6421

Affiliation Email addresses: Brock, Rebecca L.: [email protected]

Correspondence Address: Brock, Rebecca L.: University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Department of Psychology, 220 Burnett Hall, Lincoln, Nebraska, United States, 68588-0308, [email protected]

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Permissions: May use for Research/Teaching.

Fee: No fee is required for use.

Test Year: 2025

Reference’s

Brock, R. L., & Gervais, S. J. (2025). The psychometric properties of a new scale of dehumanizing deindividuation in couples. Journal of Family Psychology, 39(2), 171–183. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0001311

Items of the Dehumanizing Deindividuation in Couples (DDC) Scale

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

Instructions: Thinking about interactions with your partner over the past month, please rate the extent to which you agree with each of the following statements as it applies to you and your relationship using the scale below:

1 = strongly disagree
2 = disagree
3 = neutral
4 = agree
5 = strongly agree

Items Set 1 (Received DDC)

Over the past month ….

1. My partner disregarded my opinions

2. My partner treated me like a child

3. My partner acted superior to me

4. My partner ignored me

5. My partner talked over me

6. My partner told me they were right and I was wrong

7. My partner seemed to be irritated by me

8. I felt like I got on my partner’s nerves

9. My partner nagged me to do certain things or stop doing certain things

10. My partner was bossy toward me

Items Set 2 (Enacted DDC)

Over the past month ….

1. I disregarded my partner’s opinions

2. I treated my partner like a child

3. I acted superior to my partner

4. I ignored my partner

5. I talked over my partner

6. I told my partner they were wrong and I was right

7. I was irritated by my partner

8. My partner got on my nerves

9. I nagged my partner to do certain things or stop doing certain things

10. I was bossy toward my partner

Scoring Instructions:

1. Average items for each version (received or enacted).

2. Enacted and received scores have demonstrated high correlations, so it is recommended that correlations are reviewed in your sample, and that you consider whether to average across enacted and received scores for a dyadic level score of DDC.

3. The name of the measure and the description of the versions (received, enacted) are included for researchers, but are removed prior to measure administration with participants.