Differences in positive and negative affect dimensions: Latent trait analysis (original) (raw)
Related papers
The structure of affect: Reconsidering the relationship between negative and positive affectivity
2003
During the past decade organizational scientists have devoted considerable research attention to the topic of workplace affect. Despite important advances, continued progress depends on a better understanding of the structure of affective experience. The goal of this paper is to review progress to date. In particular, we review evidence pertaining to four constructs that have been widely used to organize research on affect: positive affectivity, negative affectivity, hedonic tone, and affect intensity. We review various structural models pertaining to these four constructs, devoting special attention to integrative frameworks and future research needs.
Personality and Individual Differences, 2011
The two strongest predictors of affect are extraversion and neuroticism. Previous research has demonstrated the extraversion-positive affect and neuroticism-negative affect relations are both strong and positively correlated. To explain these relations, researchers have hypothesized two extensions of the temperament model: the affect-level and affect-reactivity hypotheses of well-being. We used retrospective diaries to examine the support for these hypotheses and, across all three studies, we found strong support for the affect-level model -that is, extraversion predicted a consistent increase in positive affect, neuroticism tended to predict a consistent increase in negative affect. Further, these paths were significant even after controlling for the normative enjoyment and stressfulness of daily activities. In the discussion we describe how these relations provide support for the affect-level model of well-being.
personality and situational determinants of affective state
positive and negative evaluations are often negatively correlated, they should be conceptualized as bivariate, because under certain circumstances they have the potential of co-occurring. demonstrated the situational effects of both experimentally induced and naturally occurring stress on the association between positivity and negativity and demonstrated that the association of positive and negative affect (PA and NA) became more polarized-that is, the scales became more inversely correlated-under high stress.
Psychometric characteristic of positive affect scale within the academic setting
Research and Evaluation in Education, 2019
This analysis study is one of several stages that must be passed before testing the structural model. This study is initiated due to the limited information related to the measurement of the Positive Affect Scale within the academic settings. The research method used in this study was a quantitative method. It was done in among 724 students of state junior high schools in Sleman, Yogyakarta. The instrument development consisted of guideline arrangement, language feasibility testing, content validation through expert judgments, trials to measure the item discrimination index, item selection based on the item discrimination results, items representation for each indicator, and the construct validity test for the selected items. The testing of the measurement model used the data analysis techniques of Structural Equation Models (SEM) with the assistance of the AMOS program version of 21. The results of the study show that the validity analysis of the Positive Affect Scale within the a...
Individual Differences in Mood Changes
Journal of Happiness Studies, 2017
The study explores the influence of individual tendencies toward mood improvement/deterioration and the Big Five personality traits on mood changes. Participants (218 students) completed NEO-FFI and The Mood Regulation Scales. Based on the within-person structure of individual tendencies toward mood improvement/deterioration four mood regulative types were distinguished (increasing, decreasing, hot and cool type). In the experimental stage participants were randomly assigned to one of four group conditions created by experimental factors: (1) induced mood (positive/negative), and (2) the level of cognitive loading (easy/hard condition). Direct (Mood Adjective Check List) and indirect (emotional version of Lexical Decision Task) measurements were used to assess mood changes. The results showed different patterns of mood changes for increasing and decreasing regulative types. Those differences were visible especially in the positive mood regulation. While the decreasing type decreased the induced positive mood, the increasing type was characterized by mood changes manifested in energetic arousal increase and tense reduction. Moreover, high Neuroticism and low Extraversion in the decreasing type contributed to a negative mood increment manifested in reduction of energetic arousal. The same effect was revealed for high Conscientiousness for the increasing type. The results are discussed in the context of psychological status of mood regulation strategies (automatic/controlled) and with reference to previous research in this area.
Validating scales for the assessment of mood level and variability by latent state-trait analyses
1994
concerning the validity of the mood survey, a questionnaire assessing two enduring aspects of mood-mood level and mood reactivity-are reported. The analyses show that both subscales are suitable for the assessment of relatively stable aspects of mood: situational and/or interactional effects only determine 3-l 1% of the variances of the scale scores, whereas 77-89% are due to true individual differences (not determined by situational and/or interactional effects). Furthermore, in order to examine to which degree the mood level scale assesses the mood level of a person averaged across several occasions, the correlation between the latent trait variable underlying the mood level scale and a latent trait variable defined as the expectation of repeatedly measured mood states was estimated. The correlation between these latent trait variables of r = 0.78 indicates that the mood level scale is useful for the assessment of the average mood level. Finally, to validate the reactivity scale, subgroups differing with regard to the scores on the reactivity scale were analysed to examine the degree to which their actunl mood is influenced by situational and/or interactional effects. The results show that the actual mood of people with high mood reactivity scores is influenced to a much higher degree by situational and/or interactional effects that the momentary mood of people with low mood reactivity scores.
Individual Difference Variables, Affective Differentiation, and the Structures of Affect
Journal of Personality, 2003
Methodological arguments are usually invoked to explain variations in the structure of affect. Using self-rated affect from Italian samples (N = 600), we show that individual difference variables related to affective differentiation can moderate the observed structure. Indices of circumplexity (Browne, 1992) and congruence coefficients to the hypothesized target were used to quantify the observed structures. Results did not support the circumplex model as a universal structure. A circular structure with axes of activation and valence was approximated only among more affectively differentiated groups: students and respondents with high scores on Openness to Feelings and measures of negative emotionality. A different structure, with unipolar Positive Affect and Negative Affect factors, was observed among adults and respondents with low Openness to Feelings and negative emotionality. The observed structure of affect will depend in part on the nature of the sample studied. The structure of affect has been extensively studied, but theoretical controversies and empirical inconsistencies remain. In this article we will argue that no single model of the structure of affect can be correct, because different people experience and report affect differently. Individual difference variables that influence affective differentiation moderate the observed structure of affect terms. Elucidating the structure of affect is important for understanding and measuring affective domains. Although many issues related to the structure of affect are controversial, one point of agreement is that two dimensions can parsimoniously describe affective experiences (e.g., Russell, 1980; Watson & Tellegen, 1985; but see Schimmack & Grob, 2000). One-factor solutions appear to be oversimplifications that do not take into account important aspects of core affect, and that explain significantly less variance than two-factor solutions (Diener, Smith, & Fujita, 1995). Three or more factors, by contrast, are not parsimonious and explain little additional variance. With self-rated affect, two dimensions consistently emerge as major factors across many cultures, different descriptor sets, time frames, response formats, and within-and between-subjects designs (
Differences in the Between–Person and Within–Person Structures of Affect Are A Matter of Degree
European Journal of Personality, 2014
This study tested whether the structure of affect observed on the basis of between–person (BP) differences is equivalent to the affect structures that organize the variability of affective states within persons (WP) over time. Further aims were to identify individual differences in the degree of divergence between the WP and BP structure and examine its association to dispositional and contextual variables (neuroticism, extraversion, well–being and stress). In 100 daily sessions, 101 younger adults rated their mood on the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule. Variability of five negative affect items across time was so low that they were excluded from the analyses. We thus worked with a modified negative affect subscale. WP affect structures diverged reliably from the BP structure, with individual differences in the degree of divergence. Differences in the WP structural characteristics and the degree of divergence could be predicted by well–being and stress. We conclude that BP and...
dimensional analyses of affect.
Within the debate on the structure of affect, a consensus began emerging in the last decade regarding the bipolarity of happiness-sadness. We argue that this consensus is premature. Focusing on the psychometrics of momentary affect, particularly happiness and sadness, and using a simulation study, a large-scale data set, and 2 experiments manipulating affect, we plot a map of affective space that departs from the consensus. One key departure is the finding that happiness and sadness are not bipolar opposites. Another is that nonuniform skewness plays a major role in studies of affective structure, but can be addressed with appropriate analyses.