Abstract

We evaluated the factor structure, reliability, and discriminative capacity of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) questionnaire in four different samples: two general adult populations (N = 1,548, N = 964), one adolescent population (N = 1,044), and young people with depressive symptomatology (N = 307). Exploratory factor analyses (EFAs) were performed with subsamples from Studies 1 (n = 773) and 2 (n = 527), finding that the two- and three-factor solutions had a good fit. In a confirmatory factor analysis, the two-factor solution resulted in an adequate fit in a second set of subsamples from both studies (n = 775, n = 517). In Study 3, we found good convergent and divergent validity with adequate and significant correlations found for depression (Beck's Depression Inventory), anxiety (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory), and neuroticism and extroversion (Big Five Inventory). In Study 4, the results of an EFA performed in a subsample (n = 154) found that the two- and three-factor solutions were appropriate with the former solution being confirmed in a second subsample (n = 153). Reliability was α = .85 for positive affect and α = .87 for negative affect. The PANAS questionnaire showed adequate indicators of validity and reliability in adult and adolescent populations as well as in a sample with depressive symptoms.

Full Text
Paper version not known

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 call

Disclaimer: 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.