Dominance and Prestige Questionnaire (DPQ)

Abstract

The Dominance and Prestige Questionnaire (DPQ), developed by Körner, Heydasch, and Schütz (2023), is a 15-item psychological inventory designed to measure an individual’s self-perceived social status across two distinct facets of the self-concept. The first facet, Dominance, relates to status achieved through coercion, intimidation, or the induction of fear. The second facet, Prestige, reflects status earned through recognized skills, expertise, knowledge, or merit.

The instrument’s content was adapted primarily from established measures, notably the Dominance Prestige Scales (Cheng et al., 2010) and the Self-Perceived Social Status Scale (Buttermore, 2006). The DPQ was initially validated using German samples, including distance-learning university students and general adult participants recruited online. Its development involved rigorous psychometric evaluation, confirming its two-factor structure, strong reliability, and robust validity evidence.

Keywords

Dominance, Prestige, Self-Concept Facets, Social Status, Social Dominance, Personality Assessment

Authors

Körner, Robert, Heydasch, Timo, Schütz, Astrid

[quads id=5]

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Dominance and Prestige Questionnaire (DPQ) is to assess current self-concept facets related to perceived social status. Specifically, it differentiates between two fundamental pathways to status: the coercive approach (Dominance) and the consensual, merit-based approach (Prestige).

The constructs measured by the DPQ are considered highly relevant across various life domains, providing insights into how individuals perceive their standing and influence within different social contexts, such as family environments, professional settings, and academic institutions. By focusing on self-perception, the DPQ offers a metric for internalizing social rank based on these two distinct strategies.

Construct

The DPQ measures two theoretically distinct but related dimensions of social status perception: Dominance and Prestige.

• Dominance: This factor captures self-perceived status attained through force, fear, or coercive means. High scorers on this subscale perceive themselves as having influence due to their ability to intimidate others, assert their will regardless of opposition, and induce fear of consequences.

• Prestige: This factor measures self-perceived status earned through respect, admiration, and voluntary deference. High scorers are viewed by others as experts, possess unique talents or abilities, and are sought out for advice based on their achievements and competence.

The inventory operationalizes these concepts as facets of the self-concept, providing a framework for understanding how individuals internally construct their social standing relative to their peer groups.

Validity

The validity of the DPQ was rigorously examined, providing strong support for both its nomological and criterion validity.

Nomological Validity: Support for nomological validity was established through comprehensive investigations of the DPQ’s associations with a broad set of psychological variables. The Dominance and Prestige factors demonstrated theoretically consistent relationships with 72 distinct personality variables, confirming that the DPQ measures constructs that fit within the existing network of personality theory.

Criterion Validity: Criterion validity was supported by examining how the DPQ scores correlated with 14 objective criteria. This analysis ensured that the self-reported status dimensions accurately predicted external, measurable outcomes relevant to social standing and influence.

Reliability

The DPQ demonstrated good to high levels of reliability across measures of internal consistency and temporal stability (test-retest reliability).

Internal Consistency: The internal consistency for both factors was found to be good, indicating that the items within each subscale reliably measure the same underlying construct. For the Dominance factor, Cronbach’s alpha was calculated at .81. For the Prestige factor, internal consistency was slightly higher, with a Cronbach’s alpha of .86.

Test-Retest Reliability (Temporal Stability): Both DPQ factors exhibited high temporal stability across multiple measurement points, suggesting the scale measures relatively enduring self-concept facets.

• Dominance: The stability over a 2-month period was strong, with rtt(202) = .75, p < .001. Over a 4-month interval, the stability remained high, rtt(112) = .72, p < .001. Furthermore, stability between the second and third measurement points (t2 and t3) was observed at rtt(114) = .79, p < .001.

• Prestige: The Prestige factor also showed robust stability. Over a 2-month period, the test-retest reliability was rtt(202) = .70, p < .001. Stability over 4 months was rtt(112) = .64, p < .001. The stability between t2 and t3 was particularly high for Prestige, reaching rtt(202) = .80, p < .001.

Factor Analysis

Factor analysis confirmed the theoretical expectation of a two-dimensional structure underlying the DPQ responses.

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA): The EFA results strongly supported a two-factor structure. Two factors possessed Eigenvalues greater than 1, and auxiliary tests, including the Minimum Average Partial (MAP) test, the Hull-CFI, and parallel analysis, consistently indicated that the two-factor solution was the best fit for the data. This theoretically grounded two-factor model collectively explained 50.31% of the total variance in the scale items.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA): Subsequent Confirmatory Factor Analysis validated the expected two-dimensional structure. The model exhibited satisfactory fit indices, reinforcing the distinction between the Dominance and Prestige factors. Key fit statistics were: Chi-squared(89) = 540.701, p < .001; Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = .091, 90% CI [.083, .099], p < .001; Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = .940; and Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) = .929.

Instrument

Test Type: Original Inventory/Questionnaire

Format: The DPQ is a 15-item questionnaire where responses are recorded on a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).

Language Available: German

Population Group: Human; Male; Female

Age Group: Adulthood (18 years & older)

Population Details: The scale was developed and evaluated using samples collected in Germany. The primary participants included distance-learning university students and adult participants recruited via online methods.

Test Methodology: The development involved a thorough set of psychometric evaluations, including Test Validity (Criterion Validity, Nomological Validity), Test Reliability (Internal Consistency, Test-Retest Reliability), and Factor Analysis (Confirmatory Factor Analysis, Exploratory Factor Analysis).

Keywords

Social Status, Social Dominance, Self-Concept, Coercion, Expertise, State Trait Level Measures

[quads id=5]

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier (Körner, Robert): http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8793-0830

Author ORCID Identifier (Schütz, Astrid): http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6358-167X

Affiliation Email addresses: [email protected]

Correspondence Address: University of Bamberg, Department of Psychology, Markusplatz 3, Bamberg, Germany, 96047, [email protected]

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Permissions: To obtain permissions for use, researchers and practitioners must contact the publisher of the original article.

Commercial Use: No

Fee: No

Test Year: 2023

Reference’s

Körner, R., Heydasch, T., & Schütz, A. (2023). Dominance and prestige as self-concept facets. Journal of Personality Assessment, 105(5), 590–609. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2022.2137028

[quads id=5]

Items of the Dominance and Prestige Questionnaire (DPQ)

The Dominance and Prestige Questionnaire (DPQ) is a 15-item scale.

Factors and Subscales: The DPQ measures two distinct factors/subscales:

• Dominance

• Prestige

Note. Items are rated from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). P=Prestige; D=Dominance. Items marked with an asterisk were taken from the Dominance Prestige Scales (Cheng et al., 2010) and the Self- Perceived Social Status Scale (Buttermare, 2006).