Aggregation, acquiescence, and the assessment of trait affectivity

General affect ratings are subject to problems that lessen their validity. Some critics therefore have argued that aggregated on-line ratings provide better measures of trait affectivity. However, aggregated mood ratings suffer from two significant problems. First, correlations among same-valenced affects are substantially higher, indicating poorer discriminant validity. Second, cross-valence correlations are much weaker, reflecting a virtual absence of bipolarity. We show how both of these effects are due to an inflated acquiescence component in aggregated data. We also demonstrate that (a) these effects are a direct result of the aggregation process itself and (b) controlling for acquiescence counteracts these effects. These results indicate that the validity of aggregated mood ratings is lessened by an augmented acquiescence component.