Abstract
The independence of positive and negative affect has been heralded as a major and counterintuitive finding in the psychology of mood and emotion. Still, other findings support the older view that positive and negative fall at opposite ends of a single bipolar continuum. Independence versus bipolarity can be reconciled by considering (a) the activation dimension of affect, (b) random and systematic measurement error, and (c) how items are selected to achieve an appropriate test of bipolarity. In 3 studies of self-reported current affect, random and systematic error were controlled through multiformat measurement and confirmatory factor analysis. Valence was found to be independent of activation, positive affect the bipolar opposite of negative affect, and deactivation the bipolar opposite of activation. The dimensions underlying D. Watson, L. A. Clark, and A. Tellegen's (1988) Positive and Negative Affect schedule were accounted for by the valence and activation dimensions. A consensus on a descriptive structure of current affect is at hand—if we can only agree on what the structure is. The psychology of mood, emotion, and affect needs a consensual structure and is tantalizingly close to achieving one. Among the remaining disagreements, the most puzzling and persistent is bipolarity versus independence. Is positive affect the bipolar opposite of, or is it independent of, negative affect? Are happiness and sadness two ends of one continuum, or separate entities, like apples and oranges? A resolution to this puzzle is needed to answer questions about the number of dimensions of affect, how affect should be measured, and the underlying processes involved. Despite repeated attempts, a solution to this puzzle remains elusive, and a long-simmering debate has recently flared up. Much is at stake in this debate, for important lines of research have arisen on these opposing assumptions. This article offers conceptual and empirical analyses aimed at resolving the dispute.
Keywords
Affiliated Institutions
Related Publications
Measurement error masks bipolarity in affect ratings.
For years, affect researchers have debated about the true dimensionality of mood. Some have argued that positive and negative moods are largely independent and can be experience...
Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales.
In recent studies of the structure of affect, positive and negative affect have consistently emerged as two dominant and relatively independent dimensions. A number of mood scal...
Interviewers’ Moods and Evaluations of Job Applicants: The Role of Applicant Qualifications<sup>1</sup>
Participants were induced to experience positive affect, negative affect, or no shift in current affect. Then they conducted a simulated job interview with an applicant (actuall...
Cognitive, Affective, and Attribute Bases of the Satisfaction Response
An attempt to extend current thinking on postpurchase response to include attribute satisfaction and dissatisfaction as separate determinants not fully reflected in either cogni...
Interviewer's Moods and Reactions to Job Applicants: The Influence of Affective States on Applied Social Judgments<sup>1</sup>
Male and female subjects interviewed a same‐sex applicant for an entry‐level management position. In reality, this person was an accomplice who presented a carefully standardize...
Publication Info
- Year
- 1998
- Type
- article
- Volume
- 74
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 967-984
- Citations
- 1312
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
Cite This
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1037/0022-3514.74.4.967