Dominance and Prestige Questionnaire (DPQ)

Abstract

The Dominance and Prestige Questionnaire (DPQ) (Körner, Heydasch, & Schütz, 2023) is an advanced psychometric self-report instrument designed to evaluate an individual’s self-perceived social status across two distinct evolutionary and behavioral pathways: dominance (status attained and maintained through intimidation, fear, manipulation, and coercive force) and prestige (status achieved through demonstrated competence, knowledge, valuable skills, and freely conferred deference). Adapted and refined from the pioneering conceptualizations of Cheng et al. (2010) and Buttermore (2006), the DPQ consists of 15 carefully curated items evaluated using a 7-point Likert response format ranging from 1 (strongly disagree / trifft überhaupt nicht zu) to 7 (strongly agree / trifft voll und ganz zu).

Psychometrically validated across extensive German adult populations, including online community cohorts and distance-learning university students, the DPQ captures stable yet contextually active self-concept facets of human hierarchy navigation. The instrument exhibits robust internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of .81 for the Dominance subscale and .86 for the Prestige subscale. Longitudinal assessments demonstrate high test-retest reliability across two-month ($r_{tt} = .75$ for dominance; $r_{tt} = .70$ for prestige) and four-month ($r_{tt} = .72$ for dominance; $r_{tt} = .64$ for prestige) evaluation intervals. Both exploratory factor analysis (EFA)—substantiated by parallel analysis, the Hull method, and Velicer’s Minimum Average Partial (MAP) test—and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA; $\chi^2(89) = 540.701$, $\mathrm{CFI} = .940$, $\mathrm{TLI} = .929$, $\mathrm{RMSEA} = .091$) robustly confirm an oblique two-dimensional structure accounting for 50.31% of the total variance. Extensive investigations examining associations with 72 personality variables and 14 objective behavioral criteria confirm the questionnaire’s extensive nomological, convergent, and discriminant validity across occupational, educational, and interpersonal spheres.

Keywords

Dominance, Prestige, Social Status, Self-Concept Facets, Dual-Strategies Theory, Evolutionary Psychology, Interpersonal Hierarchy, Personality Assessment, Psychometrics, Social Dominance, Structural Equation Modeling, Nomological Network

Authors

The Dominance and Prestige Questionnaire (DPQ) was developed and validated by:

• Robert Körner — Institute of Psychology, Martin-Luther-University of Halle-Wittenberg, Germany. ORCID: 0000-0001-8793-0830.
• Timo Heydasch — Institute of Psychology, Distance University of Hagen (FernUniversität in Hagen), Germany.
• Astrid Schütz — Department of Psychology, Personality Psychology and Psychological Assessment, Otto-Friedrich-University of Bamberg, Germany. ORCID: 0000-0002-6358-167X. Correspondence: University of Bamberg, Department of Psychology, Markusplatz 3, 96047 Bamberg, Germany. Email: [email protected].

Purpose

The overarching purpose of the Dominance and Prestige Questionnaire (DPQ) is to provide a theoretically grounded, psychometrically sound, and practically efficient diagnostic instrument to measure self-perceived social status across distinct behavioral styles. Humans are inherently social animals driven by the fundamental motivation to acquire and sustain social rank. However, the psychological mechanisms through which individuals attain social influence, peer deference, and group leadership vary substantially. The DPQ operationalizes these rank-attainment mechanisms as enduring yet dynamic facets of the self-concept, distinguishing between status rooted in coercive power versus status derived from earned social esteem.

In applied organizational and industrial settings, the DPQ serves as a diagnostic tool for understanding leadership styles, managerial efficacy, and team dynamics. Leaders who rely predominantly on dominance strategies often achieve short-term compliance through intimidation, threat of sanctions, and micromanagement, frequently fostering toxic workplace climates, employee turnover, and interpersonal counterproductive work behaviors (CWB). Conversely, leaders high in prestige inspire genuine organizational commitment, foster knowledge sharing, and promote psychological safety, as their authority stems from demonstrated expertise, prosocial modeling, and mutual respect. Administering the DPQ enables organizational consultants, executive coaches, and human resource professionals to identify destructive leadership liabilities and tailor leadership development interventions toward prestige-oriented behaviors.

In clinical, personality, and counseling psychology, the DPQ provides critical insights into interpersonal conflict, personality pathology, and psychological adjustment. Dominance-oriented self-perceptions often overlap with antagonistic traits, Machiavellianism, and hubristic pride, which can predispose individuals to volatile interpersonal relationships, alienate social support systems, and exacerbate cluster B personality disorders. In contrast, prestige-oriented self-concepts correlate positively with authentic pride, robust self-esteem, subjective well-being, and social support. In educational and research contexts, the DPQ allows investigators to examine how status self-concepts influence group problem-solving, academic achievement, negotiations, peer victimization, and social hierarchy formation across diverse life domains, including family dynamics, athletic teams, and higher education environments.

Psychological Construct

The psychological constructs measured by the DPQ are rooted in the dual-strategy framework of human social hierarchy (Henrich & Gil-White, 2001). Rather than treating social status as a unidimensional continuum of generalized power or prestige, this model posits two distinct, evolved behavioral pathways for navigating social rank: Dominance and Prestige.

Dominance

Dominance refers to the attainment of social status through coercive force, fear, intimidation, aggression, and manipulative control. In the DPQ, the dominance dimension captures an individual’s self-concept as someone who imposes their will upon others, commands obedience, and uses coercive leverage to secure compliance. Dominant individuals do not necessarily possess pro-social skills or task-relevant competence; rather, their influence rests on their perceived ability to inflict costs or withhold vital resources from group members. Cognitively, the dominance self-concept is characterized by hubristic pride, an authoritarian mindset, and high levels of interpersonal antagonism. Behaviorally, it manifests in assertive dominance displays, interruption of others, forceful verbal directives, and willingness to escalate interpersonal conflicts to prevail. While dominance can be an effective short-term mechanism for extracting concessions or establishing control in highly regimented, competitive, or crisis-driven environments, it generally elicits resentment, calculated compliance, avoidant coping in subordinates, and subversion when monitoring is removed.

Prestige

Prestige, in contrast, represents the acquisition of social status through freely conferred deference, respect, admiration, and social acknowledgment of exceptional skill, wisdom, or knowledge. The prestige facet of the DPQ measures an individual’s self-perception as an expert whose counsel is sought, whose opinions are valued, and whose accomplishments are respected by peers. Unlike dominance, prestige is sustained by prosociality, emotional intelligence, authentic competence, and genuine generosity in sharing expertise. Subordinates defer to prestigious individuals voluntarily because doing so facilitates cultural learning, skill acquisition, and mutual benefit. Prestige correlates robustly with authentic pride, agreeableness, conscientiousness, positive emotionality, and stable self-esteem. Prestige-oriented leaders foster intrinsic motivation, organizational trust, and cooperative team cohesion, as their status is continuously legitimized by the voluntary consent of their followers.

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical architecture of the DPQ is grounded in the evolutionary psychology of social hierarchy, most prominently formulated in the evolutionary dual-strategy theory of status by Henrich and Gil-White (2001). According to this model, human social hierarchy differs fundamentally from the linear dominance hierarchies observed in non-human primates. In non-human primates, rank is almost exclusively determined through physical power, agonistic encounters, and reproductive coercion—a purely dominance-based regime. However, with the emergence of cumulative cultural transmission, language, and complex tool-use in hominid evolution, natural selection favored an alternative status mechanism: prestige.

Henrich and Gil-White posited that human groups face adaptive challenges that require cultural learning. Naive individuals benefit by identifying, approaching, and copying highly skilled, knowledgeable models. To gain proximity and sustained access to these cultural models, social learners freely confer social deference, praise, and gifts upon skilled individuals. In exchange, the prestigious model permits observational learning and direct instruction. Consequently, prestige evolved as an adaptive cultural learning mechanism, characterized by voluntary follower alignment, admiration, and non-agonistic status. Dominance, by contrast, represents an phylogenetically ancient, agonistic mechanism driven by cost-infliction capacities, coercion, and resource monopoly.

In contemporary personality psychology, Cheng et al. (2010) empirically validated Henrich and Gil-White’s evolutionary thesis within modern social groups, demonstrating that dominance and prestige operate as two distinct, functional avenues to social influence. Expanding upon this foundation, Körner, Heydasch, and Schütz (2023) conceptualized dominance and prestige not merely as observed social states, but as foundational facets of the self-concept. Self-concept theory posits that an individual’s self-schemas regarding how they achieve status shape their social perceptions, affective reactions, goals, and behavioral strategies across multiple life domains.

The DPQ theoretical framework integrates these evolutionary perspectives with Robert Hogan’s socioanalytic theory, which argues that human personality is driven by two master motives: “getting along” (communion, affiliation) and “getting ahead” (status, agency). Prestige elegantly reconciles getting ahead with getting along, as high status is achieved via pro-social contribution and social integration. Dominance, however, pursues getting ahead at the expense of getting along, decoupling agency from communion. By measuring both facets simultaneously, the DPQ captures the intricate balance individuals strike between these evolutionary imperatives.

Validity

The psychometric validity of the DPQ has been rigorously established across extensive investigations, evaluating construct, convergent, discriminant, nomological, and criterion-related validity (Körner, Heydasch, & Schütz, 2023).

Nomological Network and Personality Associations

To substantiate construct validity, the authors evaluated the DPQ against a comprehensive nomological network encompassing 72 personality variables:

• Big Five Personality Traits: Dominance correlates positively with Extraversion (specifically assertive agency) and negatively with Agreeableness ($r = -.35$ to $-.45$), reflecting its inherently antagonistic nature. Prestige exhibits robust positive correlations with Agreeableness ($r = .25$ to $.35$), Conscientiousness ($r = .30$ to $.40$), Extraversion ($r = .35$ to $.45$), and Openness to Experience, confirming its pro-social and achievement-oriented character.
• Pride Dimensions: Corroborating evolutionary models (Tracy & Robins, 2007), Dominance exhibits a selective positive relationship with hubristic pride (arrogance, conceitedness), whereas Prestige demonstrates strong positive correlations with authentic pride (accomplishment, confidence, self-worth).
• The Dark Triad: Dominance displays strong convergent correlations with the Dark Triad traits—namely Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and narcissistic entitlement. Prestige shows negligible or negative associations with psychopathy and Machiavellianism, but correlates moderately with agentic, non-pathological aspects of narcissistic admiration.
• Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) and Power: Dominance correlates substantially with SDO and the personal desire for power and coercive authority. In contrast, Prestige aligns with social responsibility, prosocial values, and leadership self-efficacy.

Criterion-Related Validity

Criterion validity was systematically verified through associations with 14 objective criteria and real-world behavioral outcomes:

• Peer and Observer Ratings: In round-robin and peer-assessment laboratory designs, self-reported DPQ dominance predicted peer-rated pushiness, intimidating nonverbal behaviors, and conversational interruptions. Conversely, self-reported DPQ prestige predicted peer-rated competence, advice-seeking behaviors by group members, and voluntary nominations for group leadership.
• Academic and Professional Attainment: Prestige scores correlated significantly with actual academic performance, professional awards, and indices of social network centrality, whereas dominance was uncorrelated with academic achievement and was negatively correlated with peer-rated collaborative effectiveness.
• Well-Being and Mental Health: Prestige correlated positively with life satisfaction, subjective well-being, and social support. Dominance showed no positive relation to life satisfaction and exhibited modest positive associations with interpersonal strain and conflict frequency.

Reliability

The Dominance and Prestige Questionnaire exhibits exemplary reliability profiles across multiple testing modalities, including internal consistency and multi-wave temporal stability evaluations (Körner et al., 2023).

Internal Consistency

Across diverse adult validation samples, both DPQ subscales demonstrated strong internal consistency:

• Dominance Subscale: Cronbach’s $\alpha = .81$, indicating high item homogeneity and dependable scale cohesion across its 8 items without excessive item redundancy.
• Prestige Subscale: Cronbach’s $\alpha = .86$, reflecting excellent internal consistency and unified scale measurement across its 7 items.

Test-Retest Reliability (Temporal Stability)

Longitudinal assessments conducted across multiple time intervals confirm that the DPQ captures enduring self-concept facets while maintaining sensitivity to long-term developmental shifts:

• Two-Month Interval ($t_1$ to $t_2$): The test-retest reliability coefficient for the Dominance subscale was $r_{tt}(202) = .75, p < .001$. For the Prestige subscale, stability was $r_{tt}(202) = .70, p < .001$.
• Four-Month Interval ($t_1$ to $t_3$): Over an extended four-month period, temporal stability remained substantial: Dominance yielded $r_{tt}(112) = .72, p < .001$, while Prestige yielded $r_{tt}(112) = .64, p < .001$.
• Subsequent Interval ($t_2$ to $t_3$): Stability between the second and third measurement points demonstrated even greater consolidation, yielding $r_{tt}(114) = .79, p < .001$ for Dominance and $r_{tt}(202) = .80, p < .001$ for Prestige.

These empirical metrics demonstrate that self-perceived dominance and prestige operate as stable, trait-like self-concept facets over time.

Factor Analysis

The structural dimensionality of the DPQ was comprehensively examined using both exploratory and confirmatory factor analytic frameworks (Körner et al., 2023).

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

An exploratory factor analysis was initially performed to determine the latent structure of the item pool. Multiple statistical criteria were employed to decide on the number of latent dimensions to retain:

• Kaiser-Guttman Criterion: Extracted exactly two factors with eigenvalues greater than 1.0.
• Scree Plot and Parallel Analysis: Horn’s parallel analysis unequivocally indicated that only the first two empirical eigenvalues exceeded the 95th percentile of eigenvalues generated from random data matrices.
• Hull Method and MAP Test: Both the Hull comparative fit index (Hull-CFI) and Velicer’s Minimum Average Partial (MAP) test consistently confirmed a two-factor structure as optimal and parsimonious.
• Variance Explained: The oblique two-factor solution accounted for 50.31% of the total variance, with items loading strongly on their designated target factor ($> .50$) and exhibiting negligible cross-loadings ($< .20$).

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

To cross-validate the structural model in an independent validation cohort, a confirmatory factor analysis was conducted specifying two correlated latent factors (Dominance and Prestige). The hypothesized two-dimensional model exhibited satisfactory fit indices:

• Model Chi-Square: $\chi^2(89) = 540.701, p < .001$
• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): $.940$
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI): $.929$
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): $.091$, 90% confidence interval $[.083, .099], p < .001$
• Factor Intercorrelation: The latent correlation between the Dominance and Prestige factors was modest ($r \approx .10$ to $.20$, depending on sample characteristics), confirming that dominance and prestige represent distinct, orthogonal-to-weakly-correlated routes to social status rather than opposing poles of a single spectrum.

Instrument / Measurement Tool

The Dominance and Prestige Questionnaire (DPQ) is structured as follows:

• Test Type: Original psychometric inventory / self-report rating questionnaire.
• Primary Dimensions / Subscales:
  • Dominance Subscale: 8 items assessing self-perceived status achieved through assertiveness, intimidation, control, and coercion (Items 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15).
  • Prestige Subscale: 7 items assessing self-perceived status achieved through competence, expertise, respect, and admiration (Items 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14).
• Item Count: 15 items total.
• Administration Format: Standardized paper-and-pencil or computer-administered / online questionnaire. Administration time is approximately 3 to 5 minutes.
• Response Scale: 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree / trifft überhaupt nicht zu to 7 = strongly agree / trifft voll und ganz zu).
• Target Population: Adults (18 years and older); general population, university cohorts, and organizational personnel.
• Scoring Rules:
  • Reverse Scoring: Items 7 and 13 on the Dominance subscale, and Item 10 on the Prestige subscale, are negatively phrased and must be reversed prior to computing scale scores: $\text{Item}_{\text{recoded}} = 8 – \text{Item}_{\text{original}}$.
  • Subscale Mean Calculation: Subscale scores are calculated as the unweighted arithmetic mean of their corresponding items after reverse-scoring:
    • $$\text{Dominance Score} = \frac{\text{Item 1} + \text{Item 3} + \text{Item 5} + \text{Item 7}_{\text{rev}} + \text{Item 9} + \text{Item 11} + \text{Item 13}_{\text{rev}} + \text{Item 15}}{8}$$
    • $$\text{Prestige Score} = \frac{\text{Item 2} + \text{Item 4} + \text{Item 6} + \text{Item 8} + \text{Item 10}_{\text{rev}} + \text{Item 12} + \text{Item 14}}{7}$$
  • Interpretation: Mean scores range from 1.0 to 7.0 for each dimension. Higher scores denote greater reliance on that specific status-attainment pathway in the respondent’s self-concept.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Dominance and Prestige Questionnaire (DPQ) was formally published in 2023 by Robert Körner, Timo Heydasch, and Astrid Schütz in the Journal of Personality Assessment.

• Copyright & Permissions: The instrument and its foundational psychometric data are copyrighted by the authors and Taylor & Francis Group. For non-commercial academic research, pedagogical purposes, and non-funded clinical investigation, the questionnaire items may be used with proper scholarly citation of the original source publication (Körner et al., 2023).
• Commercial Use: Any commercial deployment, inclusion in proprietary diagnostic software, corporate consulting platforms, or for-profit assessment environments requires written permission and licensing through the corresponding author (Prof. Dr. Astrid Schütz, University of Bamberg) or the publisher.
• Fee: There is no fee for academic and non-commercial research use.

References

• Buttermore, N. (2006). Distinguishing prestige and dominance: Two distinct pathways to status [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of California, Los Angeles.
• Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., & Henrich, J. (2010). Pride, personality, and the evolutionary foundations of human social status. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31(5), 334–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.02.004
• Henrich, J., & Gil-White, F. J. (2001). The evolution of prestige: Freely conferred deference as a mechanism for enhancing the benefits of cultural transmission. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22(3), 165–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(00)00071-4
• Hogan, R. (1983). A socioanalytic theory of personality. In M. M. Page (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation 1982: Personality—Current theory and research (pp. 55–89). University of Nebraska Press.
• 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
• Tracy, J. L., & Robins, R. W. (2007). The psychological structure of pride: A tale of two facets. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(3), 506–525. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.3.496

Items of the Scale