Overview and Characteristics of Scales Assessing Power, Status, Dominance, and Prestige

(you want to add a new scale? Please send the manuscript along with the scale to blind-due-to-peer-review@com)

Construct (according to our definition)	Instrument [Context]	Authors’ definition of measured construct	Measured variable and factors	Items	Reliability		Validity			Notes		Languages		Score (out of 8; based on +)
			Labeled-construct content validity | Consensus content validity	Availability	Internal consis-tency	Sta- bility	Item gene-ration	Formal analysis	Relation with other variables
Power (as potential influence)	Personal Sense of Power Scale [general & relationship-specific] (Anderson et al., 2012)	Perception of one’s ability to influence another person or other people	+ | + ability to influence	+ 8 (e.g., “In my relationships with others… My wishes do not carry much weight.”)	+	+	+	+	+		Measurement invariant across sex		EN, GE, IT, SP		8.0
Power (as potential influence)	Feeling Powerful and Desiring Power Scales [general] (Murphy et al., 2022)	a perception of one’s capacity to influence others desire for greater capacity to influence others	+ | + ability to influence power motive	+ 6 + 6 (e.g., “I like to tell people what they should do”)	+	-	+	+	+				EN		7.0
Power (as potential influence)	Relationship Power Inventory [romantic partner] (Farrell et al., 2015)	the ability or capacity to change the partner’s thoughts, feelings, and/or behavior so they align with one’s own desired preferences, along with the ability or capacity to resist influence attempts imposed by the partner	+ | + ability to influence 1) Self Power (Outcome) 2) Self Power (Process) 3) Other Power (Outcome) 4) Other Power (Process)	+ 20 (e.g., “I have more say than my partner does when we make decision in this domain”)	+	+	+	+	+		Overall version and versions for 10 domains (e.g., future plans)		EN, SP		8.0
Power/Dominance (see fourth column)	Power/Control Scales [romantic partner] (Kroupin, 2011)	power: the capacity to use oneself to have an impact on other; control: the capacity to restrain or regulate influence	+ | - several hierarchy variables (e.g., dominance) 1) Self-power 2) Other-Power 3) Self-Control 4) Other-Control	+ 100 (e.g., “My partner takes charge when he/she is with me”)	+	-	+/-	+/-	+				EN		5.0
Power (as potential influence)	Couple Power Scale [romantic partner] (e.g., LeBaron et al., 2019)	level of influence one has over another	+/- | +/- ability to influence (but also some other variables)	+ 15 (e.g., “My partner tends to discount my opinion”)	+	+	-	-	+/-		Scale is part of Flourishing Families Project		EN		4.5
Power (see fourth column)	Relationship Balance Assessment [romantic partner] (Luttrell et al., 2018)	relative balance of power in terms of time discretion, relational maintenance, emotional expression and avoidance, accommodation, saving and spending, sexual dominance, economic roles of child care and occupational status, & social decisions	+ | - several hierarchy and other variables 1) Relational 2) Sexual 3) Emotional expression 4) Rational 5) Spending 6) Financial needs 7) Time 8) Accommodation 9) Emotional involvement 10) Status 11) Social	+ 35 (e.g., “Who generally decided whose friends to go out with?” … Mostly Him or Partner A [1] to Mostly Her or Partner B [9])	+	-	+	+	-		Cut-off scores are provided		EN		5.0
Power/Dominance (see fourth column)	Power Imbalance in Couples Scale [male same-sex couples] (Neilands et al., 2019)	person’s ability to act or make decisions relative to their partner and to influence (as well as resist the influence of) their partner	- | + coercive dominance (except subscale 2) 1) Overtly controlling partner 2) Supportive partner 3) Conflict avoidant actor 4) Overtly controlling actor	+ 62 (e.g., “My partner is controlling”)	+	-	+	+	+				EN		6.0
Power (as potential influence)	Relationship Power Scale [non-single female adolescents] (Wang et al., 2006)	ability of female adolescents to control the behaviors of their steady boyfriends	+ | +/- ability to influence	+ 7 (e.g., “I can persuade my boyfriend not to do the things I don’t want him to do”)	+	+/-	+	+	+/-		Developed with Taiwanese pupil		EN, TU		6.5
Power (as potential influence)	Couple Dominance Questionnaire [romantic partner] (Ponzi et al., 2015)	asymmetry in decision-making power	+ | + ability to influence 1) Joint activities 2) Level of emotional intimacy 3) Physical intimacy and division of labor 4) Exclusivity of relationship	+ (1 = “we always do as my partner prefers” to 5 = “we always do as I prefer” for aspects, e.g., “when deciding what to eat”)	+/-	-	-	+	-				EN		4.5
Power (as potential influence)	Interpersonal Control Scale [romantic partner] (Stets & Pirog-Good, 1990)	act of getting another to do what you want them to do and which they would otherwise not do	+ | + ability to influence (1 relevant subscale: successful control)	+ 3 (e.g., “I get my partner to act in a way that I want him/her to act”)	-	-	+/-	-	+/-				EN		4.0
Power (as potential influence)	Marital Decision-Making Scale [romantic partner] (Beach & Tesser, 1993)	decision-making power: who actually makes the decision	+ | + ability to influence (1 relevant subscale: who decides [total claimed decision-making])	- 24 (areas, e.g., how many children to have – “Who decides?” entirely my decision to entirely my spouses decision)	-	-	+/-	-	+/-				EN		3.0
Power (as potential influence)	Sexual Relationship Power Scale [HIV research] (Pulerwitz et al., 2000)	decision-making dominance, the ability to engage in behaviors against a partner’s wishes, the ability to control a partner’s actions	+ | +/- coercive dominance and other (hierarchy) variables (subscale 1); ability to influence (subscale 2) 1) Relationship control 2) Decision-making dominance	+ 23 (e.g., “Most of the time, we do what my partner wants to do”)	+	-	+	+	+		Modified version exists without condom use items		EN, AF, SP		6.5
Power (as potential influence)	Perceived Supervisor Social Power  [supervisor] (Chénard-Poirier et al., 2021)	the global perception by a follower of his/her supervisor potential to influence important organizational actors and the organizational decision-making process	+ | + ability to influence	+ 5 (e.g., “My supervisor’s decisions affect a lot of people in this company”)	+	-	+	+	+		Measurement invariant across 3 countries		EN, FR, RO		7.0
Power (as potential influence)	Global Power Scale [supervisor] (Nesler et al., 1999)	ability of a source to influence a target	+ | + ability to influence	+ 4 (e.g., “My supervisor can influence me to work harder at my job”)	+	-	+	-	+/-				EN		5.5
Power (resource control)	New Power Scales [supervisor] (Hinkin & Schriesheim, 1989)	ability to administer tangible ("things") or intangible ("feelings") outcomes for another	+  | +/- resource control but also several hierarchy variables 1) Reward power 2) Coercive power 3) Legitimate power 4) Expert power 5) Referent power	+ 20 (e.g., “My supervisor can … influence my getting a pay raise” for reward)	+	-	+	+	+				EN		6.5
Power (resource control)	Interpersonal Power Inventory [supervisor] (Raven et al., 1998)	the resources one person has available so that he or she can influence another person to do what that person would not have done otherwise	+ | +/- resource control but also several hierarchy variables 1) Reward impersonal 2) Coercive impersonal 3) Expert power 4) Referent power 5) Informational power 6) Legitimacy/position 7) Legit./reciprocity 8) Legit./dependence 9) Legit./equity 10) Personal reward 11) Personal coercion	+ 33 (e.g., “For past considerations I had received, I felt obliged to comply” for reciprocity)	+	-	+	+/-	+		No final answer whether a 11-, 7-, or 2-factor solution is preferable		EN, HE, MA		6.0
Power (resource control)	Rahim Leader Power Inventory [work] (Rahim, 1988)	ability of one party to influence or control the behavior and/or attitudes of another party	+ | +/- resource control but also several hierarchy variables 1) Reward power 2) Coercive power 3) Legitimate power 4) Expert power 5) Referent power	+ 35 (e.g., “M superior can take disciplinary action against me for insubordination” for coercive)	+	+/-	+	+	-				EN		6.0
Power (resource control)	Social Power Scales [work] (Frost & Stahelski, 1988)	(no definition of power but all power bases are defined)	+ | +/- resource control but also several hierarchy variables 1) Reward power 2) Coercive power 3) Legitimate power 4) Expert power 5) Referent power	+ 17 (e.g., “Promote them or recommend them for promotion” for reward)	-	-	+/-	+	-				EN		4.0
Power (see fourth column)	Power Scales [work] (Yukl & Falbe, 1991)	potential influence derived from position or personal characteristics	+ | +/- resource control but also several hierarchy variables 1) Positional power (authority, punishments, rewards, information) 2) Personal power (expertise, persuasiveness, likeability, charisma)	- 32 (e.g., “He/she has the authority to give you tasks or assignments”)	+	-	-	+	+/-				EN		4.0
Power/ Status (resource control; respect & esteem)	Perceived Power and Perceived Status Scales [work] (Yu et al., 2019)	asymmetric control over socially valued resources respect and admiration an actor has in the eyes of others	+ | + resource control; respect & esteem 1) Power 2) Status	+ 12 (e.g., “I have a good reputation among those I work with”)	+	+/-	+	+	+		Also report of high self-other-agreement		EN		7.5
Power	Leader’s Relational Power Scale [work] (Zhao et al., 2016)	power that stems from personal relationships with others	+ | / Relational power 1) Direct relational power 2) Indirect relational power	+ 6 (e.g., “He/she is able to acquire resources needed at work through his/her interpersonal relationships” for factor 2)	+	-	+	+	+				EN		6.0 / 7.0
Power (as potential influence)	Consumer Power Scale [consumption contexts] (Akhavannasab et al., 2022)	consumers’ perceived ability to influence a firm’s actions	+ | + ability to influence Consumer power (social power subscale)	+ 6 (e.g., “My opinion carried much weight with the […]“)	+	-	+	+	+				EN		7.0
Power	Lay Theories About Power Acquisition Scale [work] (Belmi & Laurin, 2016)	lay theories of how power is acquired	+ | / Lay beliefs on power 1) Power through prosociality 2) Power through politics	+ 30 (e.g., “Breaking rules or doing things that others might consider inappropriate”)	+	-	-	+	+				EN		5.0 / 6.0
Power	Theories of Power Scale [general] (ten Brinke & Keltner, 2020)	beliefs about how power is gained and maintained	+ | / Lay beliefs on power 1) Coercive power 2) Collaborative power	+ 20 (e.g., “Maintaining power requires ruthlessness.”)	+	-	+	+	+				EN		6.0 / 7.0
Power	Power Fluctuation Scale [work] (Anicich et al., 2020)	extent to which one subjectively perceives oneself as alternating between psychological states of high and low power across situations	+ | / Power fluctuation	+ 6 (e.g., “It is common for me to alternate between feeling powerful and powerless”)	+	-	+	+	+				EN		6.0 / 7.0
Power	Reactions to Power Scale (Warren, 2016)	how people react (psychologically) to different types of power	+ | / Reactions to power bases (coercion, control, authority, influence, manipulate, persuade, power, pressure, referent, information, legitimacy, reward, expert)	+ 7 (e.g., “Person A pressures [defined as: constrain or compel] on Person B to obtain a desired outcome … I approve of the use of the above tactic”)	+	-	+	+	+		IRT approach		EN		6.0 / 7.0
Power	Power Aversion and Responsibility Aversion Scales [general] (Hull et al., 2022)	belief that being powerful will change who they are in a negative way	+ | / Power aversion	- 9 (e.g., I would feel like a cold person if I had the power to approve people for cheap housing and food stamps”)	+	-	+	+	+		Unpublished work		EN		5.0 / 6.0
Status (respect & esteem)	Reputation Scale [work] (Hochwarter et al., 2007)	complex combination of salient personal characteristics and accomplishments, demonstrated behavior, and intended images presented over some period of time	+ | + respect & esteem (but also somewhat prestige)	- 12 (e.g., “This individual is regarded highly by others”)	+	-	-	-	+				EN		4.0
Status (respect & esteem)	Multidimensional Reputation Scale [work] (Zinko et al., 2016)	reputation for one’s interactions (or lack thereof) with those around them “become known” in organizations for ability to perform tasks reputation for being a person of integrity	+ | + respect & esteem; prestige 1) Social reputation 2) Task reputation 3) Integrity reputation	+ 4 + 4 + 4 (e.g., “This person is known to be an expert in his/her area” for task reputation)	+	-	+	+/-	+/-				EN		6.0
Status (respect & esteem)	Children Social Status Scale [pupil] (Rodkin et al., 2013)	likeability and acceptance visible and what others value	+ | + respect & esteem 1) Preference 2) Popularity	+ 2 + 3 (e.g., “these are the most Popular kids in my class” for popularity)	+	+	-	+	+/-		Peer-report scale		EN		6.5
Status (respect & esteem)	Position-Reputation-Information scale [general] (Berl et al., 2020)	relative place in the social hierarchy; social opinion and esteem; wisdom, expertise, and learning	+ | +/- several hierarchy variables (2 is respect & esteem; 3 is similar to prestige) 1) Position 2) Reputation 3) Information	+ 7 (e.g., „wealthy“ for position, „respected“ for reputation, „educated“ for information)	+	-	+	+	+/-				EN		6.0
Status (rank)	Workplace Status Scale [work] (Djurdjevic et al., 2017)	an employee’s relative standing in an organization, as characterized by the respect, prominence, and prestige he or she possesses in the eyes of other organizational members	+ | + Social rank	+ 5 (e.g., “I possess high status in my organization”)	+	+/-	+	+	+				EN		7.5
Status (rank)	MacArthur Subjective Social Status Scale [general] (Adler et al., 2000)	subjective socio-economic status	+ | + social rank	+ 1 (Place a “X” on the rung [10-step ladder] where you think you stand relative to other people [money, education, job])	Not possible	+	+	Not possible	+				EN, CH, GE, PR		6.0 / 8.0
Status (rank)	MacArthur Subjective Social Status Scale-Youth Version [pupil] (Goodman et al., 2001)	subjective socio-economic status	+ | + social rank	+ 1 (2 versions: familial placement in society; personal placement in school community)	Not possible	+	+	Not possible	+				EN		6.0 / 8.0
Status (rank)	Variants of MacArthur Subjective Social Status Scale [general] (Shane & Heckhausen, 2013)	subjective socio-economic status	+ | + social rank (family of origin) (expected personal SES)	+ 1 (Place family of origin on 10-step ladder / expected SES in 10-years on ladder)	Not possible	-	+	Not possible	+/-				EN		4.5 / 6.5
Status (rank)	Differential Status Identity Scale [general] (Thompson & Subich, 2006)	income, personal assets, personal control of the resources of others, economic security, education level, health insurance, and stability of family income; one’s perceived control of social values; prestigiousness of one’s occupation, level of consumerism, participation with other groups and subcultures, sense of value	+ | + social rank (third subscale); resource control (first subscale) (second subscale has different power concepts and other variables) 1) Economic resources 2) Social power 3) Social prestige	+ 30 + 15 + 15 (e.g., “ability to travel recreationally” – compared to others: very much below average to very much above average)	+	-	-	+	+				EN		6.0
Dominance (agentic)	Revised Interpersonal Adjective Scales [general] (Wiggins et al., 1988)	assured-dominant	+ | + agentic dominance	+ 8 (e.g., “forceful”) – circumplex structure (64 items in total)	+	-	+	+	+				EN, GE, PO, SP		7.0
Dominance (see fourth column)	Impact Message Inventory – Circumplex [general] (Kiesler & Schmidt, 2006)	/ (no public access)	/ | / several hierarchy and non-hierarchy variables 1) Friendly 2) Friendly-submissive 3) Submissive 4) Hostile-submissive 5) Hostile 6) Hostile-dominant 7) Dominant 8) Friendly-dominant	+/- 56 (e.g., “When I am with him/her … I have the feeling that he/she sometimes tries to patronize me”)	+	+	+	+	+		Often used in clinical samples; different item numbers in different languages; norms exist		EN, DA, DU, GE, JA		5.5 / 7.5
Dominance (agentic)	Personality Research Form – Dominance subscale [general] (Jackson, 1965)	Attempts to control environment, and to influence or direct other people, express opinions forcefully, enjoys the role of leader and may assume it spontaneously	+ | +/- agentic dominance but also several hierarchy variables	+/- 16-20 (e.g., “I feel confident when directing the activities of others“) (true-false forced choice)	+	+	+	+	+				EN, GE, SP, TU		7.0
Dominance (see fourth column)	California Psychological Inventory – Dominance subscale [general] (Gough, 1951)	prosocial interpersonal dominance, strength of will, and perseverance in pursuit of goals	+ | - several hierarchy and non-hierarchy variables	+/- 36 (e.g., “I have a natural talent for influencing people”) (true-false forced choice)	+	+	+	+	+				EN, FR		6.5
Dominance (agentic)	Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire – Social potency subscale [general] (Tellegen, 1990)	Being forceful and decisive, persuasive and liking to influence others, enjoying or would enjoy leadership roles; enjoying being noticed, being the center of attention	+ | - agentic dominance but also dominance motive	+ 25 (e.g., “When it is time to make decisions, others usually turn to me”) (true-false forced choice)	+	-	+	+	+				EN, FR, SP		6.0
Dominance (agentic)	Dominance-submissiveness scale [general] (Mehrabian & Hines, 1978)	no clear definition provided	- | / agentic dominance	- 48 (e.g., “I control others more than they control me”)	+	-	+	-	+				EN		3.0 / 4.0
Dominance (agentic)	International Personality Item Pool – Domineering subscale [general] (Goldberg et al., 2006)	/ (mirrors the CAT-PD-SF)	/ | +/- agentic dominance; need for power (from CAT-PD-SF)	+ 6 (e.g., “Boss people around”)	+	-	+/-	-	-				EN, > 25 other languages		3.0 / 4.0
Dominance (agentic)	International Personality Item Pool – Dominance subscale [general] (Goldberg et al., 2006)	/ (mirrors the California Psychological Inventory)	/ | + agentic dominance (from CPI)	+ 10 (e.g., “Impose my will on others”)	+	-	+/-	-	-				EN, > 25 other languages		3.5 / 4.5
Dominance (agentic)	International Personality Item Pool – Assured-dominant subscale [general] (Markey & Markey, 2009)	/ (mirrors the Revised Interpersonal Adjective Scales)	/ | + agentic dominance (from IPC)	+ 4 (e.g., “Do most of the talking”)	+/-	-	+	+	+				EN, > 25 other languages		5.0 / 6.0
Dominance (agentic)	Rank Style with Peers Questionnaire – Dominant leadership subscale [general] (Zuroff et al., 2010)	preferred strategies for pursuing, defending, and, when necessary, relinquishing social rank - assume a leadership role, in a dominant, assertive, and self-promoting fashion	+ | + agentic dominance (1 relevant subscale)	+ 6 (e.g., “I often take initiative and make suggestions”)	-	+	+	+	+				EN		7.0
Dominance	Dominance scale [relationship] (Hamby, 1996)	decision-making power; right to intrude upon the other's behavior; failure to equally value the other partner & overall negative appraisal of partner's worth	+ | +/- coercive dominance (mostly in second subscale) and agentic dominance (often in first subscale) but also several other hierarchy variables 1) Authority 2) Restrictiveness 3) Disparagement	+ 32 (e.g. “I dominate my partner” for authority)	+	-	+	+	+				EN		6.5
Dominance	Fearless-Dominance from Psychopathic Personality Inventory-Revised [clinical] (Edens & McDermott, 2010)	social potency, fearlessness, stress immunity	+ | / Fearless-dominance	+/- 58 (for both aspects of psychopathy; subscales social influence, fearlessness, and stress immunity are relevant; e.g., “If I really want to, I can convince most people of almost anything”)	+	-	+	+	+/-				EN		5.0 / 6.0
Dominance	Fearless-Dominance from Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire [general] (Blonigen et al., 2006)	social dominance, narcissism, stress immunity, fearlessness	+ | / Fearless-dominance	+/- 24 (subscales social potency, stress reaction, and harm avoidance are relevant; e.g., “enjoy being reckless”)	+	+	+	+/-	+/-		Scale score is stable across 10 years		EN		5.5 / 6.5
Dominance	Fearless-Dominance from NEO-PI-R [general] (Witt et al., 2010)	social dominance, immunity to stress, and thrill seeking	+ | / Fearless-dominance	+/- 17 (e.g., “social confidence”)	+	+	+	+	+/-		Scale score is stable across 10 years		EN		6.0 / 7.0
Dominance	Fearless-Dominance from IPIP-NEO [general] (Witt et al., 2009)	social dominance, emotional stability, thrill-seeking	+ | / Fearless-dominance	+ 20 (e.g., “I take charge”)	+	-	+	+/-	+/-				EN		5.0 / 6.0
Dominance	Fearless-Dominance from HEXACO-PI-R [general] (Witt et al., 2009)	social dominance, emotional stability, thrill-seeking	/ | / Fearless-dominance	- 17	+	-	+	+/-	+/-				EN		3.0 / 5.0
Dominance	Fearless-Dominance from MMPI-2-RF [general] (Sellbom et al., 2012)	stress immunity, social potency, fearlessnes	/ | / Fearless-dominance	+/- Only relevant MMPI subscales are stated	+	-	+	-	+				EN		3.5 / 5.5
Dominance (coercive)/ Prestige	Dominance-Prestige Scales [strategies] (Cheng et al., 2010)	use of intimidation and coercion to attain a social status based largely on the effective induction of fear; status granted to individuals who are recognized and respected for their skills, success or knowledge	+ | +/- coercive dominance, dominance motive, prestige 1) Dominance 2) Prestige	+ 17 (e.g., “Some people are afraid of me”)	+	+	+	+	+				EN		7.5
Dominance (coercive)/ Prestige/ Status	Self-Perceived Social Status Scale [general] (Buttermore, 2004)	use of force or the threat of force to gain resources; deference that is freely given by others; rewards that are reaped via dominant or prestigious strategies	+ | +/- coercive dominance and other hierarchy variables (dominance subscale), prestige, agentic dominance (status subscale) 1) Dominance 2) Prestige 3) Status	+ 28 (e.g., “I believe I have to fight my way to the top” for dominance)	+	-	+	+	+/-				EN, SP		6.0
Dominance (coercive)/ Prestige	Dominance Prestige Questionnaire (general) (Körner et al., 2023)	self-perception of coercive, intimidating, and aggressive behavior to enforce one’s will; self-perception of being respected and admired for skills and expertise	+ | + coercive dominance, prestige 1) Dominance 2) Prestige	+ 15 (e.g., “Others are convinced of my achievements”)	+	+	+	+	+				EN, GE		8.0
Need for Power	Unified Motive Scale [general] (Schönbrodt & Gerstenberg, 2012)	concern about having impact on other people by influencing their attitudes, emotions, or behaviors and concern about having status and prestige	+ | +/- Power motive (1 relevant subscale)	+ 10 (e.g., “I like to have the final say”)	+	+/-	+	+	+		Short versions with 6 and 3 items available		EN, GE		7.0
Need for Power	Index of Personal Reactions [general] (Bennett, 1988)	egoistic striving for position [of power] to be able to impose one’s will desire to persuade and affect others	+ | +/- Power motive (2 relevant subscales: need for power; need for influence)	+ 13 + 9 (e.g., “I would enjoy being a powerful executive or politician” for need for power)	+	+	+	+	+				EN		7.5
Need for Power	Need for Power Scale [general] (Moon et al., 2022)	desire for power for one’s own ends; desire for power to help others	+ | +/- need for power, status or dominance 1) Personalized 2) Socialized	+ 18 (e.g., “I want to be able to have the power to help others succeed”)	+	-	+	+	+				EN		6.5
Need for Power	Hedonic and Eudaimonic Motives for Power Scale [general] (Narh et al., 2022)	pursuit of power with the aim of achieving personal pleasure and comfort while exerting minimal effort; pursuit of power as a tool for achieving goals that are personally meaningful and mutually beneficial to others	+ | / Motives 1) Hedonic power motive (self-benefit) 2) Eudaimonic power motive (3 subfactors: mutual benefit, growth, cognitive assessment)	- 6 + 16 (e.g., “Power would be desirable if... I could enhance the well-being of others”)	+	-	+	+	-		Unpublished work		EN		4.0 / 5.0
Need for dominance	Manifest Needs Questionnaire – (Dominance subscale) [work] (Steers & Braunstein, 1976)	no definition provided	- | + Dominance motive	+ 5 (e.g., “I strive to be “in command” when I am working in a group”)	+	+/-	+	-	+				EN		5.5
Need for Power, Status	Achievement Motivation Scale [general] (Cassidy & Lynn, 1989)	desire to lead or to be in position of dominance; motivation, which is reinforced by climbing the social status hierarchy, includes the desire to be dominant, to be a leader	+/- | - several hierarchy variables (2 subscales are relevant; dominance motive is also about power) 1) Dominance motive 2) Status aspiration motive	+ 7 + 7 (e.g., “People take notice of what I say” for power motive)	+	-	+	+	+		Dominance motive is actually power motive		EN		5.5
Need for Dominance, Status	Motive Profile Following the Zurich Model [general] (Schönbrodt et al., 2009)	dealing with hierarchy and dominance issues; dealing with a prestige hierarchy: the one receiving most attention from others is the one with the highest rank	/ | / several hierarchy variables (power scale is dominance; prestige scale is status) 1) Power motive 2) Prestige motive	- 6 + 6 (e.g., “It is important for me that my partner speaks very well of me” for prestige)	+	-	+	+	-		Power motive is actually dominance motive; prestige is status		EN, GE		3.0 / 5.0
Need for Dominance, Prestige	Dominance-Prestige-Leadership Scale [general] (Suessenbach et al., 2019)	wanting to coerce others into adhering to one’s will; wanting to obtain admiration and respect	+ | + need for dominance/prestige (2 relevant subscales) 1) Dominance motive 2) Prestige motive	+ 10 + 10 (e.g., “I enjoy bending others to my will”)	+	-	+	+	+		Short versions (6 or 4 items per scale) exist		EN, GE		7.0
Status Concern	Concern for Reputation Scale [general] (de Cremer & Tyler, 2005)	the identity concern of one’s status evaluation	+ | + Status concern	+ 7 (e.g., “I am rarely concerned about my reputation”)	+	-	-	+	+/-				EN		5.5
Need for Status	Need for Status subscale from the New Machiavellianism Scale [general] (Dahling et al., 2009)	desire to accumulate external indicators of success (wealth, power, status)	+ | +/- Need for status	+ 3 (e.g., “Status is a good sign of success in life”)	+	-	+	+	+				EN, GR		6.5
Need for Dominance, Status	Social Goal Questionnaire – Dominance and popularity subscales [pupil] (Jarvinen & Nicholls, 1996)	no definition provided	- | + Need for dominance; respect & esteem 1) Dominance motive 2) Status motive	+ 6 + 5 (e.g., “When I’m with people my own age, I like it when… they are afraid of me”)	+	-	+	+	+				EN		6.0