The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) among Mexican married persons from Monterrey
Abstract
The objective of the article is to study the internal consistency, construct validity, and distribution the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) among Mexican married persons. A sample of 727 participants (52.8% women and 47.2% men) was collected by random routes in Monterrey and its metropolitan area, Mexico. The PANAS, the Relationship Assessment Scale, and the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding were applied. The overall internal consistency was excellent. The PANAS presented a two-factor structure. By dropping item 12, a from-good-to-adequate fit and a good fit-parsimony relationship were achieved. The internal consistency of Positive Affect (PA) factor was excellent, and the one of Negative Affect (NA) factor was good. The distribution of the total score (Affective Intensity = AI) followed a normal curve. The central tendency in AI, PA and NA was equivalent between men and women. PA was correlated with marital satisfaction with a strong strength of association, NA with a moderate strength of association, and AI weak. Social desirability had a small effect size on PA and NA, and trivial on AI. It is concluded that the two-factor model is validated, and the PANAS presents internal consistency and concurrent construct validity.
Downloads
References
Arbuckle, J. L. (2013). IBM SPSS Amos 22. User's guide. Chicago, IL: Amos Development Corporation.
Alcalá, V., Camacho, M., Giner, D., Giner, J., & Ibáñez, E. (2006). Afectos y género. Psicothema, 18(1), 143-148.
American Psychological Association (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. With the 2016 amendment to standard 3.04. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press. Recuperado 8 de agosto del 2018 de http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/
Audrain‐McGovern, J., Rodriguez, D., & Leventhal, A. M. (2014). Gender differences in the relationship between affect and adolescent smoking uptake. Addiction, 110, 519-529. doi: 10.1111/add.12797
Bloch, L., Haase, C. M., & Levenson, R. W. (2014). Emotion regulation predicts marital satisfaction: More than a wives’ tale. Emotion, 14(1), 130-144. doi: 10.1037/a0034272
Bonett, D. G., & Wright, T. A. (2014). Cronbach's alpha reliability: Interval estimation, hypothesis testing, and sample size planning. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(1), 3-15. doi: 10.1002/job.1960
Brunner, M., Nagy, G., & Wilhelm, O. (2012). A tutorial on hierarchically structured constructs. Journal of Personality, 80, 796-846. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00749.x
Byrne, B. (2016). Structural equation modeling with AMOS (3a ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Cassaretto, M., & Martínez, P. (2017). Validación de las escalas de bienestar, de florecimiento y afectividad. Pensamiento Psicológico, 15(1), 19-31. doi: 10.11144/Javerianacali.psicologíapositivaSI15- 1.VEFA
Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245-276. doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10
Chaplin, T. M. (2015). Gender and emotion expression: A developmental contextual perspective. Emotion review. Journal of the International Society for Research on Emotion, 7(1), 14-21. doi: 10.1177/1754073914544408
Child, D. (1990). The essentials of factor analysis (2a ed.). London: Cassel Educational Limited.
Courtney, M. G. R. (2013). Determining the number of factors to retain in EFA: using the SPSS R-menu v2.0 to make more judicious estimations. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 18(8), 1-14. Recuperado 8 de agosto del 2018 de http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=18&n=8
Crawford, J. R., & Henry, J. D. (2004). The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS): Construct validity, measurement properties and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 43, 245-265. doi: 10.1348/0144665031752934
Del Castillo, M., Moreno-Rosset, C., Martín, M. D., & Ramírez–Uclés, I. (2009). Gender differences in affect, emotional maladjustment and adaptive resources in infertile couples: a positive approach. Anuario de Psicología, 5, 39-46.
Diener, E., Larsen, R. J., Levine, S., & Emmons, R. A. (1985). Intensity and frequency: Dimensions underlying positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1253-1265.
Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, Ch., Choi, D., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2010). New well- being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicators Research, 97(2), 143-156. doi: 10.1007/s11205-009-9493-y
Domínguez, S. A., & Rodríguez, A. (2017). Índices estadísticos de modelos bifactor. Interacciones. Revista de Avances en Psicología, 3(2), 59-65. doi: 10.24016/2017.v3n2.51
Ebel, R. L. (1954). Procedures for the analysis of classroom tests. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 14, 352-364. doi: 10.1177/001316445401400215
Ekman, P. (2016). What scientists who study emotion agree about. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(1), 31-34. doi: 10.1177/1745691615596992
Flores, P. E., & Medrano, L. A. (2016). El afecto y sus dimensiones: Modelos contrastados mediante análisis factorial confirmatorio de la escala I. Liberabit, 22(2), 173-184.
Friedlander, M. L., Escudero, V., Welmers-van de Poll, M. J., & Heatherington, L. (2018). Meta-analysis of the alliance–outcome relation in couple and family therapy. Psychotherapy, 55, 356-371. doi: 10.1037/pst0000161
Galinha, I. C., Pereira, C. R., & Esteves, F. G. (2013). Confirmatory factor analysis and temporal invariance of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 26, 671-679. doi: 10.1590/s0102-79722013000400007
Gargurevich, R., & Matos, L. (2012). Validez y confiabilidad dela Escala de Afecto Positivo y Negativo (SPANAS) en estudiantes universitarios peruanos. Revista de Psicología (Trujillo), Perú, 14(2), 208-217.
Graham, J. M., Diebels, K. J., & Barnow, Z. B. (2011). The reliability of relationship satisfaction: A reliability generalization meta-analysis. Journal of Family Psychology, 25, 39-48. doi: 10.1037/a0022441.
Gray, E. K., & Watson, D. (2007). Assessing positive and negative affect via self-report. En J. A. Coan & J. J. B. Allen (Eds.), Handbook of emotion elicitation and assessment (pp. 171-184). New York: Oxford University Press.
Guia Roji (2014). Guía Roji 2014. Ciudad de Monterrey, área metropolitana y alrededores. Ciudad de México: autor.
Hancock, G. R., & Mueller, R. O. (2001). Rethinking construct reliability within latent variable systems. In R. Cudeck, S. du Toit, & D. Sörbom (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: Present and future - A Festschrift in honor of Karl Jöreskog (pp. 195–216). Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
Hendrick, S. S., Dicke, A., & Hendrick, C. (1998). The relationship assessment scale. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15, 137-142. doi: 10.1177/0265407598151009.
Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179-185. doi: 10.1007/BF02289447
Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática (2013). Censo de población y vivienda 2010. Principales resultados por localidad. Ciudad de México: INEGI. Recuperado de: http://www.inegi.org.mx/est/contenidos/proyectos/ccpv/cpv2010/iter_2010.aspx
Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 141-51. doi: 10.1177/001316446002000116
Kelley T. L. (1939). The selection of upper and lower groups for the validation of test items. Journal of Educational Psychology, 30, 17-24. doi:10.1037/h0057123
Kragel, P. A., & LaBar, K. S. (2016). Decoding the Nature of Emotion in the Brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20, 444-455. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2016.03.011
Li, C. H. (2016). The performance of ML, DWLS, and ULS estimation with robust corrections in structural equation models with ordinal variables. Psychological Methods, 21, 369-387. doi: 10.1037/met0000093
Lindquist, K. A., Satpute, A. B., Wager, T. D., Weber, J., & Barrett, L. F. (2015). The brain basis of positive and negative affect: evidence from a meta-analysis of the human neuroimaging literature. Cerebral Cortex, 26, 1910-1922. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhv001
Lloret, S., Ferreres, A., Hernández, A., & Tomás, I. (2014). El análisis factorial exploratorio de los ítems: una guía práctica, revisada y actualizada. Anales de Psicología, 30, 1151-1169. doi: 10.6018/analesps.30.3.199361.
Martínez, A., Iriarte, L., Martín, S., & Navarro, L. (2016). Evaluación de la calidad de la relación de pareja en personas con infertilidad a través del modelo circumplejo. Medicina Reproductiva y Embriología Clínica, 3(2), 75-84. doi: 10.1016/j.medre.2016.05.001
McDonald, R.P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Medrano, L. A., Flores, P. E., Trógolo, M., Curarello, A., & González, J. (2015). Adaptación de la Escala de Afecto Positivo y Negativo (I) para la población de Estudiantes Universitarios de Córdoba. Anuario de Investigaciones de la Facultad de Psicología, 2(1), 22-36.
Merz, E. L., Malcarne, V. L., Roesch, S. C., Ko, C. M., Emerson, M., Roma, V. G., & Sadler, G. R. (2013). Psychometric properties of Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) original and short forms in an African American community sample. Journal of Affect Disorders, 151, 942-949. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2013.08.011
Merz, E. L. & Roesch, S. C. (2011). Modeling trait and state variation using multilevel factor analysis with PANAS daily diary data. Journal of Research in Personality, 45(1), 2-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2010.11.003.
Montero, I., & León, O. G. (2005). Clasificación y descripción de las metodologías de investigación en psicología. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 5(1), 115-127.
Moral, J. (2011). La Escala de afecto positivo y negativo (PANAS) en parejas casadas mexicanas. Revista CIENCIA Ergo Sum, 18(2), 1-9.
Moral, J. (2015). Validación del modelo unidimensional de la Escala de Valoración de la Relación en personas casadas y en unión libre de Monterrey, México. Revista Internacional de Psicología, 14(2), 1-70.
Moral, J., García, C. H., & Antona, C. J. (2012). Traducción y validación del Inventario Balanceado de Deseabilidad Social al Responder en una muestra probabilística de estudiantes universitarios mexicanos. Revista de Psicología GEPU, 3(2), 20-32.
Moriondo, M., De Palma, P., Medrano, L. A., & Murillo, P. (2012). Adaptación de la escala de afectividad positiva y negativa (I) a la población de adultos de la ciudad de Córdoba: Análisis psicométricos preliminares. Universitas Psychologica, 11(1), 187-196.
Mulaik, S. A., James, L. R., Van Alstine, J., Bennett, N., Lind, S., & Stilwell, C. D. (1989). Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 430-445. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.430
Pedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. (1991). Measurement, design, and analysis An integrated approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Perinelli, E., & Gremigni, P. (2016). Use of social desirability scales in clinical psychology: A systematic review. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 72, 534-551doi: 10.1002/jclp.22284
Quirin, M., Wróbel, M., Norcini-Pala, A. Stieger, S., Brosschot, J., Kazén, M., …. Kuhl, J. (2018). A cross-cultural validation of the Implicit Positive and Negative Affect Test (IPANAT). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 34, 52-63. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000315
Raiche, G., Roipel, M., & Blais, J. G. (junio, 2016). Non graphical solutions for the Cattell’s scree test. Trabajo presentado en The International Annual Meeting of the Psychometric Society, Montreal. Recuperado de: https://webdocs.cs.ualberta.ca/~nray1/CMPUT615/PCA/IMPS_PRESENTATION_2006.pdf
Randall, A. K., & Bodenmann, G. (2017). Stress and its associations with relationship satisfaction. Current Opinion in Psychology, 13, 96-106. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.05.010
Real Academia Española (2005). Diccionario panhispánico de dudas. Extraído de: http://www.rae.es/recursos/diccionarios/dpd.
Reise, S. (2012). The rediscovery of bifactor measurement models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47, 667-696. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2012.715555
Rovai, A. P., Baker, J. D., & Ponton, M. K. (2014). Social science research design and statistics (2a ed.). Chesapeake, VA: Watertree Press.
Sanmartín, R., Vicent, M., Gonzálvez, C., Inglés, C. J., Díaz-Herrero, Á., Granados, L., & García-Fernández, J. M. (2018). Positive and Negative Affect Schedule-Short Form: Factorial invariance and optimistic and pessimistic affective profiles in Spanish children. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 392. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00392
Scott, M. (2018). Contributions to estimation of polychoric correlations. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 53, 247-266. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2017.1419851
Seib-Pfeifer, L.-E., Pugnaghi, G., Beauducel, A., & Leue, A. (2017). On the replication of factor structures of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). Personality and Individual Differences, 107, 201-207. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.11.053
Simon, R. W., & Nath, L. E. (2004). Gender and emotion in the United States: Do men and women differ in self-reports of feelings and expressive behavior? The American Journal of Sociology, 109, 1137-1177. doi: 10.1086/382111
Stanley, K. (2017). Affect and emotion: James, Dewey, Tomkins, Damasio, Massumi, Spinoza. En D. R. Wehrs & T. Blake (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of affect studies and textual criticism (pp. 97-112). Cham, Suiza: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-63303-9_2
Sullivan, K. T, & Lawrence, E. (Eds) (2016). The Oxford handbook of relationship science and couple interventions. New York: Oxford University Press.
Terracciano, A., McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2003). Factorial and construct validity of the Italian positive and negativeaffect schedule (PANAS). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 19(2), 131-141. doi: 10.1027//1015-5759.19.2.131
Timmons, A. C., Margolin, G., & Saxbe, D. E. (2015). Physiological linkage in couples and its implications for individual and interpersonal functioning: A literature review. Journal of Family Psychology, 29, 720-731. doi: 10.1037/fam0000115
Tomczak, M., & Tomczak, E. (2014). The need to report effect size estimates revisited. An overview of some recommended measures of effect size. Trends in Sport Sciences, 1(21), 19-25.
Trizano, I., & Alvarado, J. M. (2016). Best alternatives to Cronbach's alpha reliability in realistic conditions: congeneric and asymmetrical measurements. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(769), 1-8. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00769
Velicer, W. F., Eaton, C. A., & Fava, J. L. (2000). Construct explication through factor or component analysis: A review and evaluation of alternative procedures for determining the number of factors or components. En R. D. Goffin & E Helmes, (Eds.), Problems and solutions in human assessment (pp. 41-71). Boston: Kluwer. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4615-4397-8_3
Visschers, J., Jaspaert, E., & Vervaeke, G. (2015). Social desirability in intimate partner violence and relationship satisfaction reports: an exploratory analysis. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 32, 1401-1420. doi: 10.1177/0886260515588922
Watson, D. (2000). Mood and temperament. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.54.6.1063
Watson, D., Stasik, S., Ro, E., & Clark, L. (2013). Integrating normal and pathological personality: Relating the DSM-5 trait-dimensional model to general traits of personality. Assessment, 20, 312-326. doi: 10.1177/1073191113485810
Watson, D., Wiese, D., Vaidya, J., & Tellegen, A. (1999). The two general activation systems of affect: Structural findings, evolutionary considerations, and psychobiological evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 820-838. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.76.5.820
Von Humboldt, S., Monteiro, A., & Leal, I. (2015). Validation of the PANAS: A measure of positive and negative affect for use with cross-national older adults. Review of European Studies, 9(2), 10-19. doi: 10.5539/res.v9n2p10
Copyright (c) 2019 Interacciones
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The authors retain the copyright and give the journal the right of the first publication and that they can edit it, reproduce it, distribute it, exhibit it and communicate it in the country and abroad through printed and digital media.
The digital version of the journal is registered under a Creative Commons license (Under Creative Commons License): Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). Therefore, this work can be reproduced, distributed and publicly communicated in digital format, provided that the names of the authors and Interacciones.
Therefore, it is established that authors can make other independent and additional behavioural agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the article published in this journal (eg, include it in institutional repositories or publish it in a book) as long as it is clearly indicated that the work was published for the first time in this journal.
