The PANAS structure revisited: on the validity of a bifactor model in community and forensic samples

The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) is a widely used inventory for the assessment of affect in psychology and other applied sciences. Despite its popularity, the structure of the PANAS is still under debate. On the one hand, there is evidence of the traditional 2-factor model with Positive Affect (PA) and Negative Affect (NA) as uncorrelated factors. On the other hand, a more complex structure of the PANAS has been discussed. To shed further light on the core dimensions of the PANAS, 2 studies investigated the structure of the PANAS in 2 German samples (N = 354 and N = 364, respectively) by means of confirmatory factor analysis. The factor analysis results of Study 1 for a traitlike time frame instruction suggested a suboptimal model fit for the uncorrelated 2-factor model and the 3-factor model with PA, Afraid, and Upset as factors, whereas a superior model fit occurred for a bifactor model with traitlike PA, NA, and a general 3rd factor named Affective Polarity. In Study 2, the bifactor model was replicated for a statelike PANAS time frame instruction and evidence of criterion validity was provided for PA, NA, and Affective Polarity factors in 2 sex offender subgroups and in a community sample. With Affective Polarity, we introduce an affect dimension that captures additional variance beyond PA and NA. Because of the adjectives with relevant loadings on Affective Polarity, this general factor represents an individual's orientation toward approach and withdrawal, respectively.     

Aging and symptoms of anxiety and depression: structural invariance of the tripartite model

Negative affect measures were evaluated in a cross-sectional community sample of adults aged 18-93 (N = 335) to examine the structure of neuroticism, anxiety, and depressive symptoms in young, middle, and older adult cohorts. Structural equation modeling was used to contrast 3 nested models: a 1-factor general distress model; a 2-factor high negative-low positive affect model; and a 3-factor "tripartite model" reflecting a higher order Negative Affect factor that is common to depression and anxiety problems and 2 lower order factors, Low Positive Affect (mostly specific to depression) and Arousal (specific to anxiety/panic). As expected, the tripartite model fit best for all age groups. Further, multigroup analyses indicated age invariance for the tripartite model, suggesting the model can be effectively applied with older populations.     

The independence of positive and negative affect depends on the affect measure

This study examined the degree of independence between Positive Affect (PA) and Negative Affect (NA) within a given situation. The affective state was measured before and after an experimentally induced success or failure experience in an anagram task. Two types of affect measures were used to assess PA and NA: the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) and a Pleasantness-Unpleasantness scale. Consistent with our hypotheses, results show that PA and NA are independent when measured with the PANAS but are correlated when assessed with the other scale. These PA-NA correlations differed significantly from each other before and after emotion induction, respectively. Additional analyses indicate that both PA scales are differentially sensitive to the mood induction procedure. The findings are discussed with respect to circumplex models of emotion.     

A psychometric analysis of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule for Children-Parent Version in a school sample

The current study was the 1st to examine the psychometric properties of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule for Children-Parent Version (PANAS-C-P) using a large school-based sample of children and adolescents ages 8 to 18 (N = 606). Confirmatory factor analysis supported a 2-factor (correlated) model of positive affect (PA) and negative affect (NA). The PANAS-C-P scale scores also demonstrated acceptable internal consistency and convergent and divergent validity. The PANAS-C-P PA and NA scale scores also related to measures of anxiety and depression in a manner consistent with the tripartite model. Scale means and standard deviations were reported by grade and sex to provide normative data for the PANAS-C-P scales. Results from the present study provide initial support for the PANAS-C-P as a parent-reported perspective of youth PA and NA among school-based youths.     

Brief Book,Software, and Test Announcements

This study extended previous cross-cultural work regarding the tripartite model of anxiety and depression by developing Serbian translations of the Positive and Negative Affect Scale for Children (PANAS–C), the Physiological Hyperarousal Scale for Children (PH–C), and the Affect and Arousal Scale (AFARS). Characteristics of the scales were examined using 449 students (M age = 12.61 years). Applying item retention criteria established in other studies, PH–C, PANAS–C, and AFARS translations with psychometric properties similar to English-language versions were identified. Preliminary validation of the scales was conducted using a subset of 194 students (M age = 12.37 years) who also completed measures of anxiety and depression. Estimates of reliability, patterns of correlations among scales, and age and gender differences were consistent with previous studies with English-speaking samples. Findings regarding scale validity were mixed, although consistent with existing literature. Serbian translations of the PH–C, PANAS–C, and AFARS mirror the original English-language scales in terms of both strengths and weaknesses.     

Comparison of the PAD and PANAS as models for describing emotions and for differentiating anxiety from depression

Positive (PA) and Negative (NA) Affect scales were analyzed using the Pleasure-Arousal-Dominance (PAD) Emotion Model. PA was weighted by high arousal, pleasure, and dominance (listed in order of beta weights), thus approximating exuberance in PAD space. NA and markers of somatic anxiety were weighted by displeasure, high arousal, and submissiveness, approximating anxiety in PAD space. PA (or exuberance) represented only one of four basic variants of positive affect (exuberant, relaxed, dependent, docile) and NA (or anxiety) represented only one of four basic categories of negative affect (hostile, anxious, disdainful, bored). Thus, PA and NA lacked validity as general and balanced measures of positive and negative affect, respectively. Indeed, the counterintuitive mutual independence of PA and NA was possible only because PA (and NA) dealt narrowly with selective aspects of positive (negative) affect. The PAD alternative to the tripartite model showed anxiety and depression shared unpleasant and submissive temperament characteristics but differed because anxiety involved more arousability than depression.     

Modeling trait and state variation using multilevel factor analysis with PANAS daily diary data

This study used daily diary data to model trait and state Positive Affect (PA) and Negative Affect (NA) using the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). Data were collected from 364 college students over five days. Intraclass correlation coefficients suggested approximately equal amounts of variability at the trait and state levels. Multilevel factor analysis revealed that the model specifying two correlated factors (PA, NA) and correlated uniqueness terms among redundant items provided the best fit. Trait and state PA and NA were generally associated with stress, anxiety, depression, and three types of self-esteem (performance, academic, social). The coefficients describing these relationships differed somewhat, suggesting that trait and state measurement may have different predictive utility.     

A test of the tripartite model of depression and anxiety in older adult psychiatric outpatients

This study examined the tripartite model of depression and anxiety in 131 psychiatric outpatients, ages 55-87. Confirmatory factor analyses revealed that a 3-factor model provided an adequate fit to the observed data, that the 3-factor model was empirically superior to 1- or 2-factor models, and that the 3-factor structure obtained in the current sample of older adult outpatients converged with that obtained on a separate, younger 'sample. Negative affect was significantly related to depression and anxiety symptoms and syndromes, and positive affect was more highly related to depression than anxiety symptoms and syndromes. Ways for taking into account possible age-associated differences in emotion in older adults and thus improving the conceptual model of anxiety and depression are briefly noted.     

The Affective Temperaments: Differences between Adolescents in the Big Five Model and Cloninger’s Psychobiological Model of Personality

Positive (PA) and negative affect (NA) are indicators or markers of well-being that also reflect stable emotional- temperamental dispositions. In three different studies, self-reported affect was measured by the Positive Affect and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). The PANAS measures affect as two separate dimensions and was therefore used to generate four affective temperaments (AFTs): self-actualizing (high PA and Low NA), high affective (high PA and high NA), low affective (low PA and low NA), and self-destructive (low PA and high NA). The present set of studies investigated differences in personality between AFTs in an adolescent sample (N?=?398). Personality was measured by two different models: The Big Five and Cloninger’s psychobiological model. The interaction of PA and NA was expected to reveal differences and similarities in intrapersonal behavior measured by both models of personality. The results show that low NA adolescents reported lower levels of neurotic behavior than high NA adolescents. Nevertheless, despite the experience of high NA respectively, low PA, high and low affective reported higher Self-Directedness than self-destructive adolescents. Implications of the AFTs framework are discussed.     

Anxiety and Depression in Children: A Preliminary Examination of the Utility of the PANAS-C

Recent research has questioned the validity of identifying depression and anxiety as separate constructs in children. The current investigation examined the usefulness of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule for Children (PANAS-C) in differentiating between anxiety and depression in children while also providing needed reliability and validity data on the PANAS-C. In addition, the relationship between positive and negative affect and coping was examined. Subjects included 110 third through fifth graders from a semirural public school setting. Children completed the PANAS-C, as well as self-report measures of depression, anxiety, and coping strategies. Moderate item–total correlations and high internal consistency indicated that the PANAS-C has good reliability. Validity results were mixed: a two-factor solution resembled previous studies, and negative affect was associated with avoidance coping strategies whereas positive affect was associated with approach coping strategies, as expected. However, correlations of positive and negative affect, anxiety, and depression scales suggest that positive and negative affectivity are negatively related in children as opposed to separate and independent constructs. Results of the present investigation question the validity of the use of the PANAS-C for differentiating anxiety and depression with this age group and lend support to the possibility that high overlap between anxiety and depression in this age group may be specific for childhood depression.     

The relationship between positive and negative affect in the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule

The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) is one of the most widely used affect scales. Nevertheless, the relation between its two scales, positive affect (PA) and negative affect (NA), is still controversial. Previous results that suggest independence between NA and PA were limited to manifest variables. In this study, the relation between PA and NA for both state and trait instructions was analyzed by means of structural equation modeling. Two hundred ninety-two participants responded to the PANAS at three occasions of measurement. No association was found between trait PA and NA, but significant negative correlations between state PA and NA emerged. In the second step, the observed variance of state PA and NA was decomposed into a dispositional component, an occasion-specific component, a method-specific component, and a component due to measurement error by employing a multi-construct latent state–trait model. This analysis confirmed and extended the results of our first analysis: the dispositional components of state PA and NA were unrelated. In contrast, the situation-specific components were negatively associated. Thus, the negative correlation between state PA and NA could be traced back to situation-specific effects.     

Measuring Clarity of and Attention to Emotions

To clarify what is actually measured by the trait version of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI; Spielberger, Gorsuch, &; Lushene, 1970), we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis of various models and evaluated convergent and discriminant validity. The best fit was obtained with both a bifactor model, comprising 2 specific factors plus a general factor, and a 1-construct, 2-method model. The total score and the 2 method subscales of the STAI trait version were more strongly correlated with depression than with anxiety. In the bifactor model with 2 specific factors, the depression subscale showed stronger correlations with measures of depression than with measures of anxiety. The correlation of the hypothetical anxiety subscale with measures of depression was equivalent to or higher than its correlation with measures of anxiety. These results suggest that the questionnaire does not strictly evaluate anxiety but, rather, negative affect.     

The state-trait anxiety inventory, trait version: does it really measure anxiety?

To clarify what is actually measured by the trait version of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI; Spielberger, Gorsuch, & Lushene, 1970), we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis of various models and evaluated convergent and discriminant validity. The best fit was obtained with both a bifactor model, comprising 2 specific factors plus a general factor, and a 1-construct, 2-method model. The total score and the 2 method subscales of the STAI trait version were more strongly correlated with depression than with anxiety. In the bifactor model with 2 specific factors, the depression subscale showed stronger correlations with measures of depression than with measures of anxiety. The correlation of the hypothetical anxiety subscale with measures of depression was equivalent to or higher than its correlation with measures of anxiety. These results suggest that the questionnaire does not strictly evaluate anxiety but, rather, negative affect.     

Differentiating anxious and depressive self-statements in youth: factor structure of the Negative Affect Self-Statement Questionnaire among youth referred to an anxiety disorders clinic

Conducted a factor analysis on the items from the Negative Affect Self-Statement Questionnaire (NASSQ; Ronan, Kendall, & Rowe, 1994). This analysis yielded 4 factors (Depressive Self-Statements, Anxiety/Somatic Self-Statements, Negative Affect Self-Statements, and Positive Affect Self-Statements) broadly consistent with both the content-specificity hypothesis (Beck & Clark, 1988) and L. A. Clark and Watson's (1991b) tripartite model of anxiety and depression. The association between children's self-talk and measures of trait anxiety and depression was also examined. Self-statements with content theoretically specific to depression were the best predictors of self-reported depressive symptoms, but the results were less clear for trait anxiety. Overall, these results provide evidence for the discriminability of anxious and depressive self-talk in youth and for the utility of the NASSQ as a cognitive assessment instrument.     

Affect, personality, and social activity.

These studies examined relations between social activity and state and trait measures of Positive and Negative Affect. In Study 1 Ss completed scales relevant to 3-factor models of personality and a weekly mood and social activity questionnaire for 13 weeks. In Study 2 Ss completed measures of the 5-factor model of personality and a daily mood and social activity survey for 6-7 weeks. In within- and between-Ss analyses, socializing correlated significantly with state measures of Positive Affect and with trait measures of Extraversion/Positive Emotionality. These relations were relatively general across various types of positive affect and social events; however, specific types of social events also were differentially related to affect. In contrast, social activity had no consistent association with measures of Negative Affect or the other personality dimensions. The results support a temperamental view of Extraversion.     

Changes in affect during treatment for depression and anxiety

We tested the hypothesis that the tripartite model [Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1991). Tripartite model of anxiety and depression: Psychometric evidence and psychometric implications. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100, 316-336] can be extended to account for change during treatment for anxiety and depression. Forty-one patients treated naturalistically in private practice with cognitive behavior therapy completed weekly measures of depression, anxiety, negative affect (NA), positive affect (PA), and anxious arousal (AA). Consistent with the model, NA was associated with anxiety and depression during treatment, PA was more strongly related to depression than to anxiety, and AA was more strongly related to anxiety than to depression. As predicted, symptoms of depression and anxiety and NA all decreased during treatment. As predicted, AA also decreased, particularly for patients with panic disorder. PA increased during treatment, but only for patients who showed a significant decline in depression and only over an extended period of treatment. Nearly two-thirds of the variance in anxiety change was accounted for by changes in depression and NA, and just over three-fourths of the variance in depression change was accounted for by changes in anxiety and NA, indicating that much of the change in anxiety and depression across the course of treatment is shared in common.     

Facets of dynamic positive affect: differentiating joy, interest, and activation in the positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS)

This article proposes the differentiation of Joy, Interest, and Activation in the Positive Affect (PA) scale of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; D. Watson, L. A. Clark, & A. Tellegen, 1988). Study 1 analyzed the dynamic course of PA before, during, and after an exam and established the differentiation of the three facets. Study 2 used a multistate-multitrait analysis to confirm this structure. Studies 3-5 used success-failure experiences, speaking tasks, and feedback of exam results to further examine PA facets in affect-arousing settings. All studies provide convincing evidence for the benefit of differentiating three facets of PA in the PANAS: Joy, Interest, and Activation do have distinct and sometimes even opposite courses that make their separation meaningful and rewarding.     

Evidence for a third factor on the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule in a college student sample

The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) was originally developed to measure two orthogonal dimensions of affect. The present study examined the factor structure of the PANAS in a sample of 302 undergraduates. maximum Likelihood factor analysis was used to compare two- and three-factor solutions to self-rated affect. The two-factor solution resulted in confirmation of the two factors of Positive and Negative Affect hypothesized to underlie the schedule. When, however, a three-factor solution was specified, the Positive Affect factor was retained, while the Negative Affect factor split into two lower-order factors generally consistent with the Upset and Afraid factors described by Mehrabian in 1997. These findings highlight the need for research to consider the possible influence of a third affective dimension, such as Dominance-Submissiveness on self-rated affective experience.     

The Affective Temperaments and Well-Being: Swedish and Iranian Adolescents’ Life Satisfaction and Psychological Well-Being

The aim was to investigate the role of the affective temperament model (AFTs) in distinguishing variations in well-being among adolescents from Sweden (n = 222) and Iran (n = 120). Participants self-reported positive (PA) and negative affect (NA), life satisfaction (LS) and psychological well-being (PWB). The model categorizes participants in four different temperaments using the Positive Affect and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS): self-actualizing (high PA and low NA), high affective (high PA and high NA), low affective (low PA and low NA), and self-destructive (low PA and high NA). Across cultures, self-actualizing adolescents reported higher LS and PWB. The PWB sub-scale of self-acceptance was positively related to LS regardless of temperament profile or cultural background. Nevertheless, Iranian adolescents with self-destructive profiles reported higher LS than high affective Iranians. The AFTs model is suggested to offer something unique by taking into account the interaction of PA and NA.