Skip to main content

Comprehensive Assessment of Sadistic Tendencies (CAST) Research Statistics

Assessment Information
  • Sample Adequacy: Established dataset with reasonably stable norms.
  • Research Status: ESTABLISHED DATASET
  • Items: 24
  • Dimensions: 5
  • Dataset Maturity: The current dataset achieved a maturity score of 75/100 and is classified as STRONG.

Table 1
Normative Dataset Overview
Descriptive characteristics of the current normative sample.
Participants 380
Countries Represented 58
Dataset Maturity 75/100 — StrongDataset
Research Status ESTABLISHED NORMATIVE DATASET
Sample Adequacy Established dataset with reasonably stable norms.
Data Collection Period May 21, 2026 – Sep 10, 2026
The current normative dataset consists of 380 participants collected from 58 countries.
Table 2
Score Statistics
Measures of central tendency and variability.
Mean Score 54.27%
Median Score 55
Standard Deviation 13.66
Variance 186.56
Standard Error (SEM) 0.7
Reliability (α) 0.884
Items 24
Dimensions 5
The sample demonstrated a mean score of 54.27% (Mdn = 55, SD = 13.66).
Table 3
Distribution Characteristics
Distribution shape and score dispersion indicators.
Observed Score Range 76
Maximum Observed Score 89%
Minimum Observed Score 13%
95% Confidence Interval 52.9– 55.64
Skewness -0.1
Kurtosis 0.43
Observed skewness (-0.1) and kurtosis (0.43) provide indicators of distribution quality and normality.
Global Participation Chart Participants IN 135 #1 US 65 #2 DE 23 #3 CA 21 #4 GB 12 #5 AU 10 #6 PL 9 #7 RO 9 #8 PH 8 #9 IT 5 #10 SE 4 #11 NL 3 #12 LK 3 #13 NG 3 #14 CH 3 #15 FI 3 #16 TR 3 #17 JP 3 #18 ES 3 #19 MD 3 #20 PK 3 #21 AR 2 #22 IL 2 #23 MX 2 #24 MN 2 #25 BR 2 #26 DZ 2 #27 HK 2 #28 NZ 2 #29 SG 2 #30 CO 2 #31 MY 2 #32 T1 2 #33 BE 1 #34 GR 1 #35 JO 1 #36 LT 1 #37 CN 1 #38 FR 1 #39 KZ 1 #40 PY 1 #41 UA 1 #42 BY 1 #43 EG 1 #44 HR 1 #45 KH 1 #46 MA 1 #47 SI 1 #48 CZ 1 #49 GH 1 #50 SA 1 #51 IE 1 #52 KW 1 #53 LU 1 #54 AT 1 #55 LB 1 #56 ID 1 #57 KR 1 #58
Global Participation Interpretation

The current dataset includes responses from 58countries . The largest contribution currently comes from IN which represents approximately 35.5% of all participants. International participation enhances sample diversity and improves the generalizability of normative findings across geographic regions.

Normative Percentile Distribution

Population Median 10th Percentile 37 Population Median 25th Percentile 48 Population Median 50th Percentile 55 Population Median 75th Percentile 61 Population Median 90th Percentile 73
Normative Interpretation

The current normative dataset indicates that approximately 10% of participants scored below 37%, while 90% scored above this level. The median score was 55%, meaning that half of participants scored below this value and half scored above it. Scores of 61% or greater were achieved by approximately the highest 25% of participants, whereas scores of 73% 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

10-19 2 20-29 23 30-39 21 40-49 90 50-59 137 60-69 58 70-79 32 80-89 17
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 -0.1 and a kurtosis of 0.43.

The score distribution appears reasonably balanced and does not currently suggest substantial departures from normality.

Reliability Analysis

0.884 Poor Acceptable Good Excellent

GOOD RELIABILITY

The assessment demonstrated good internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.884), suggesting that the assessment items measure a relatively coherent psychological construct.

Item–Total Correlations

Item Item Quality r Rating Q8 0.69 Excellent Q12 0.68 Excellent Q3 0.66 Excellent Q14 0.63 Excellent Q13 0.62 Excellent Q5 0.58 Excellent Q18 0.56 Excellent Q4 0.55 Excellent Q7 0.54 Excellent Q17 0.53 Excellent Q11 0.5 Excellent Q2 0.48 Acceptable Q1 0.47 Acceptable Q9 0.45 Acceptable Q22 0.44 Acceptable Q10 0.42 Acceptable Q6 0.4 Acceptable Q15 0.4 Acceptable Q16 0.35 Acceptable Q20 0.34 Acceptable Q24 0.32 Acceptable Q19 0.29 Weak Q23 0.15 Problematic Q21 -0.02 Problematic
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 identified 3 itemsthat may benefit from future review.

Items Recommended for Future Review
  • Q19 (r = 0.29)
    By staying strong, one can better help others.
  • Q21 (r = -0.02)
    I'd do anything, even break the law, for those I love.
  • Q23 (r = 0.15)
    I am a religious person.

Lower item–total correlations may indicate weaker alignment with the overall construct, greater response variability, or the need for further refinement. These findings should be interpreted cautiously and considered alongside additional psychometric evidence as the normative sample grows.

Dimension Norms

Dimension Profile Mean SD 50% Verbal Cruelty 70% 17.9 Physical Aggression 61.5% 21.3 Violence Enjoyment 58.9% 18.4 Dominance & Control 58.4% 27.7 Emotional Coldness 34.1% 12
Dimension Interpretation

The highest scoring dimension in the current sample was Verbal Cruelty (70%). The lowest scoring dimension was Emotional Coldness (34.1%). 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.

Normative Dataset Growth 126 May 2026 150 Jun 2026 239 Jul 2026 340 Aug 2026 380 Sep 2026
Dataset Growth Interpretation

The current normative dataset contains 380 participants . The cumulative growth curve illustrates how the participant sample has expanded over time. Increasing sample sizes generally improve the stability of percentile norms, reliability estimates, and other psychometric statistics.

Normative Data Notice

A total of 380 participant responses were available for this assessment. Dimension-level norms were calculated using 373 valid response records. Approximately 7 response record(s) were excluded from dimension-level normative calculations due to incomplete response patterns, historical data inconsistencies, or automated data-quality screening procedures.

Research Interpretation

This psychometric dataset currently includes 380 anonymous participant responses collected through voluntary participation. The observed mean score was 54.27 with a standard deviation of 13.66, indicating moderate score variability within the sampled population. Internal consistency reliability analysis demonstrated good reliability (Cronbach alpha = 0.884). Observed skewness (-0.1) and kurtosis (0.43) 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. Trait Profiler continuously monitors response quality, distribution stability, and internal consistency to support ethical psychometric reporting.

Dataset Export

Download CSV Dataset

Research Citation

Comprehensive Assessment of Sadistic Tendencies (CAST). Trait Profiler Interactive Research Dataset. Retrieved from https://traitprofiler.com/sadism-test/statistics/

License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)