Abstract
This study focuses on the replication and comparison of different factor structures of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS), a widely used adjective-based questionnaire which assesses positive affect (PA) and negative affect (NA). Four of the previously most prominent proposed factor models were compared by means of confirmatory actor analysis (CFA) for a trait-like instruction in a German sample (n=413). The results showed poor fit for the two-factor models and an improved fit for the three-factor models. According to RMSEA and conventional cutoff values, only the bifactor model had an acceptable fit. The fact that only a bifactor model fits to the data indicates that the PANAS has structural ambiguity. Moreover, loading invariance as well as partial intercept invariance were demonstrated for all models by means of multiple-group CFA for gender, but it was less clearly found for presentation form (paper-pencil vs. online). This implies that results from paper-pencil presentation of the PANAS probably generalize across gender but do not necessarily generalize to the online presentation form.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
