Dedicated model transformation languages are claimed to provide many benefits over the use of general purpose languages for developing model transformations. However, the actual advantages associated with the use of MTLs are poorly understood empirically. There is little knowledge and empirical assessment about what advantages and disadvantages hold and where they originate from. In a prior interview study, we elicited expert opinions on what advantages result from what factors and a number of factors that moderate the influence. We aim to quantitatively asses the interview results to confirm or reject the effects posed by different factors. We intend to gain insights into how valuable different factors are so that future studies can draw on these data for designing targeted and relevant studies. We gather data on the factors and quality attributes using an online survey. To analyse the data, we use universal structure modelling based on a structure model. We use significance values and path coefficients produced bz USM for each hypothesised interdependence to confirm or reject correlation and to weigh the strength of influence present. We analyzed 113 responses. The results show that the Tracing and Reuse Mechanisms are most important overall. Though the observed effects were generally 10 times lower than anticipated. Additionally, we found that a more nuanced view of moderation effects is warranted. Their moderating influence differed significantly between the different influences, with the strongest effects being 1000 times higher than the weakest. The empirical assessment of MTLs is a complex topic that cannot be solved by looking at a single stand-alone factor. Our results provide clear indication that evaluation should consider transformations of different sizes and use-cases. Language development should focus on providing transformation specific reuse mechanisms .