Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS): psychometric properties of the online Spanish version in a clinical sample with emotional disorders

Amanda Díaz-García, Alberto González-Robles, Sonia Mor, Adriana Mira, Soledad Quero, Azucena García-Palacios, Rosa María Baños, Cristina Botella, Amanda Díaz-García, Alberto González-Robles, Sonia Mor, Adriana Mira, Soledad Quero, Azucena García-Palacios, Rosa María Baños, Cristina Botella

Abstract

Background: The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) is the most widely and frequently used scale to assess positive and negative affect. The PANAS has been validated in several languages, and it has shown excellent psychometric properties in the general population and some clinical samples, such as forensic samples, substance users, and adult women with fibromyalgia. Nevertheless, the psychometric properties of the scale have not yet been examined in clinical samples with anxiety, depressive, and adjustment disorders. In addition, the proliferation of Internet-based treatments has led to the development of a wide range of assessments conducted online with digital versions of pen and paper self-report questionnaires. However, no validations have been carried out to analyze the psychometric properties of the online version of the PANAS. The present study investigates the psychometric properties of the online Spanish version of the PANAS in a clinical sample of individuals with emotional disorders.

Methods: The sample was composed of 595 Spanish adult volunteers with a diagnosis of depressive disorder (n = 237), anxiety disorder (n = 284), or adjustment disorder (n = 74). Factor structure, construct validity, internal consistency, and sensitivity to change were analyzed.

Results: Confirmatory factor analysis yielded a latent structure of two independent factors, consistent with previous validations of the instrument. The analyses showed adequate convergent and discriminant validity, good internal consistency as well as sensitivity to change.

Conclusions: Overall, the results obtained in this study show that the online version of the PANAS has adequate psychometric properties for the assessment of positive and negative affect in a Spanish clinical population.

Keywords: Assessment; Emotional disorders; Online; Positive and negative affect; Psychometrics; Validation.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model. Note. Rectangles are measured variables, the large circles are the latent construct, and ellipses are residual variances. Factor loadings are standardized

References

    1. Gray EK, Watson D. Assessing positive and negative affect via self-report. Handbook of emotion elicitation and assessment; 2007.
    1. Rosenberg Erika L. Levels of Analysis and the Organization of Affect. Review of General Psychology. 1998;2(3):247–270. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.247.
    1. Gross J, Sutton SK, Ketelaar T. Relations between affect and personality: support for the affect-level and affective-reactivity views. Clin Soc Psychol Bull. 1998;24(3):279–288.
    1. Parkinson B, Totterdell P, Briner R, Reynolds S. Changing moods: the psychology of mood and mood regulation. 1996.
    1. Lucas RE, Diener E, Larsen RJ. Positive psychological assessment: a handbook of models and measures. Washington: American Psychological Association; 2003. Measuring positive emotions; pp. 201–218.
    1. Russell JA. A Circumplex model of affect. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1980;39(6):1161–1178. doi: 10.1037/h0077714.
    1. Zevon Michael A., Tellegen Auke. The structure of mood change: An idiographic/nomothetic analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1982;43(1):111–122. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.43.1.111.
    1. Watson David, Clark Lee Anna, Tellegen Auke. Cross-cultural convergence in the structure of mood: A Japanese replication and a comparison with U.S. findings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1984;47(1):127–144. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.47.1.127.
    1. Bradburn NM. The structure of psychological well-being. 1969.
    1. Watson David, Tellegen Auke. Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin. 1985;98(2):219–235. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.219.
    1. Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988;54(6):1063–1070. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063.
    1. Snyder CR, Lopez SJ. Oxford handbook of positive psychology. Oxford library of psychology; 2009.
    1. Fredrickson Barbara L. The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist. 2001;56(3):218–226. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218.
    1. Tellegen A. Structures of mood and personality and their relevance to assessing anxiety, with an emphasis on self-report. In A. H. Tuma & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Anxiety and the anxiety disorders (p. 681–706). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc; 1985.
    1. Watson D, Clark LA. On traits and temperament: general and specific factors of emotional experience and their relation to the five-factor model. J Pers. 1992;60(2):441–476. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00980.x.
    1. Terracciano A, McCrae RR, Costa PT. J. Factorial and construct validity of the Italian positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS) Eur J Psychol Assess. 2003;19(2):131–141. doi: 10.1027//1015-5759.19.2.131.
    1. Gaudreau P, Sanchez X, Blondin J-P. Positive and negative affective states in a performance-related setting. Eur J Psychol Assess. 2006;22(4):240–249. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759.22.4.240.
    1. Gyollai A, Simor P, Koteles F, Demetrovics Z. Psychometric properties of the Hungarian version of the original and the short form of the positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS) Neuropsychopharmacol Hung. 2011;13(2):73–79.
    1. Gençöz T. Positive and Negative Affect Schedule: A study of validity and reliability. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi. 2000;15(46):19-28.
    1. Robles R, Páez F. Estudio sobre la traducción al español y las propiedades psicométricas de las escalas de afecto positivo y negativo (panas) Salud Ment. 2003;26(1):69–75.
    1. Lim Y-J, Yu B-H, Kim D-K, Kim J-H. The positive and negative affect schedule: psychometric properties of the Korean version. Psychiatry Investig. 2010;7(3):163. doi: 10.4306/pi.2010.7.3.163.
    1. Moriondo M, De Palma P, Medrano LA, Murillo P. Adaptación de la escala de afectividad positiva y negativa (PANAS) a la población de adultos de la ciudad de córdoba: Análisis psicométricos preliminares. Univ Psychol. 2012;11(1):187–196. doi: 10.11144/Javeriana.upsy11-1.aeap.
    1. Pires P, Filgueiras A, Ribas R, Santana C. Positive and negative affect schedule: psychometric properties for the Brazilian Portuguese version. Span J Psychol. 2013;16(2013):E58. doi: 10.1017/sjp.2013.60.
    1. Merz EL, Malcarne VL, Roesch SC, Ko CM, Emerson M, Roma VG, et al. Psychometric properties of positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS) original and short forms in an African American community sample. J Affect Disord. 2013;151(3):942–949. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2013.08.011.
    1. Pandey R, Srivastava N. Psychometric evaluation of a hindi version of positive-negative affect schedule. Ind Psychiatry J. 2008;17(1):49.
    1. Akhter N. Urdu translation and validation of shorter version of positive affect and negative affect schedule (PANAS) on Pakistani bank employees. J Pak Med Assoc. 2017;67(10):1517–1523.
    1. Sandín B, Chorot P, Lostao L, Joiner TE, Santed MA, Valiente RM. Escalas PANAS de afecto positivo y negativo: Validacion factorial y convergencia transcultural. Psicothema. 1999;11:37–51.
    1. Leue A, Beauducel A. The PANAS structure revisited: on the validity of a Bifactor model in community and forensic samples. Psychol Assess. 2011;23(1):215–225. doi: 10.1037/a0021400.
    1. Serafini K, Malin-Mayor B, Nich C, Hunkele K, Carroll KM. Psychometric properties of the positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS) in a heterogeneous sample of substance users. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2016;42(2):203–212. doi: 10.3109/00952990.2015.1133632.
    1. Estévez-López F, Pulido-Martos M, Armitage CJ, Wearden A, Álvarez-Gallardo IC, Arrayás-Grajera MJ, et al. Factor structure of the positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS) in adult women with fibromyalgia from southern Spain: the al-Ándalus project. Peer J. 2016;4:e1822. doi: 10.7717/peerj.1822.
    1. Alfonsson Sven, Maathz Pernilla, Hursti Timo. Interformat Reliability of Digital Psychiatric Self-Report Questionnaires: A Systematic Review. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2014;16(12):e268. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3395.
    1. Seib-Pfeifer L-E, Pugnaghi G, Beauducel A, Leue A. On the replication of factor structures of the positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS) Pers Individ Dif. 2017;107:201–207. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.11.053.
    1. van Ballegooijen W, Riper H, Cuijpers P, van Oppen P, Smit JH. Validation of online psychometric instruments for common mental health disorders: a systematic review. BMC Psychiatry. 2016;16(1):45. doi: 10.1186/s12888-016-0735-7.
    1. Hunsley J, Mash EJ. Evidence-based assessment. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2007;3(1):29–51. doi: 10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.3.022806.091419.
    1. Díaz-García A, González-Robles A, Fernández-Álvarez J, García-Palacios A, Baños RM, Botella C. Efficacy of a transdiagnostic internet-based treatment for emotional disorders with a specific component to address positive affect: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. BMC Psychiatry. 2017;17(1):145. doi: 10.1186/s12888-017-1297-z.
    1. Rachyla I, Pérez-Ara M, Molés M, Campos D, Mira A, Botella C, et al. An internet-based intervention for adjustment disorder (TAO): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. BMC Psychiatry. 2018;18(161):1–10.
    1. Castro A, García-Palacios A, García-Campayo J, Mayoral F, Botella C, García-Herrera JM, et al. Efficacy of low-intensity psychological intervention applied by ICTs for the treatment of depression in primary care: a controlled trial. BMC Psychiatry. 2015;15(1):106. doi: 10.1186/s12888-015-0475-0.
    1. Sheehan DV, Lecrubier Y, Sheehan KH, Amorim P, Janavs J, Weiller E, et al. The Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I.): the development and validation of a structured diagnostic psychiatric interview for DSM-IV and ICD-10. J Clin Psychiatry. 1998;59(Suppl 2):22–33.
    1. Lecrubier Y, Sheehan DV, Weiller E, Amorim P, Bonora I, Sheehan KH, et al. The MINI international neuropsychiatric interview (MINI). A short diagnostic structured interview: reliability and validity according to the CIDI. Eur Psychiatry. 1997;12(5):224–231. doi: 10.1016/S0924-9338(97)83296-8.
    1. Ferrando L, Bobes J, Gibert J. MINI. Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview. Versión en Español 5.0.0 DSM-IV. Instrumentos Detección y Orientación Diagnóstica. 2000;0:2–26.
    1. Beck AT, Steer RA, Brown GK. Beck depression inventory. San Antonio: The Psychological Corporation; 1996.
    1. Sanz J, Navarro ME, Vázquez C. Adaptación española del Inventario para la Depresión de Beck-II (BDI-II): propiedades psicométricas en estudiantes universitarios. Análisis y Modif Conduct. 2003;29(124):239–288.
    1. Sanz J, Perdigón AL, Vázquez C. Adaptación española del Inventario para la Depresión de Beck-II (BDI-II): 2. Propiedades psicométricas en población general. Clin y Salud. 2003;14(3):249–280.
    1. Sanz J, García-Vera MP, Espinosa R, Fortún M, Vázquez C. Adaptación española del Inventario para la Depresión de Beck-II (BDI-II): 3. Propiedades psicométricas en pacientes con trastornos psicológicos. Clínica y Salud. 2005;16(2):121–142.
    1. Beck AT, Brown G, Epstein N, Steer RA. An inventory for measuring clinical anxiety: psychometrical properties. J Consult ans Clincal Psychol. 1988;56(6):893–897. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.56.6.893.
    1. Sanz J, Navarro ME. Propiedades psicométricas de una versión española del Inventario de Ansiedad de Beck (BAI) en estudiantes universitarios. Ansiedad y Estrés. 2003;9(1):59–84.
    1. Magán I, Sanz J, García-Vera MP. Psychometric properties of a Spanish version of the Beck anxiety inventory (BAI) in general population. Span J Psychol. 2008;11(2):626–640. doi: 10.1017/S1138741600004637.
    1. Norman SB, Campbell-Sills L, Hitchcock CA, Sullivan S, Rochlin A, Wilkins KC, et al. Psychometrics of a brief measure of anxiety to detect severity and impairment: the overall anxiety severity and impairment scale (OASIS) J Psychiatr Res. 2011;45(2):262–268. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2010.06.011.
    1. González-Robles A, Mira A, Miguel C, Molinari G, Díaz-García A, García-Palacios A, et al. A brief online transdiagnostic measure: Psychometric properties of the Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS) among Spanish patients with emotional disorders. PLoS One. 2018;13(11):e0206516. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0206516.
    1. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JBW. The PHQ-9 validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med banner. 2001;16(9):606–613. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x.
    1. Muñoz-Navarro R, Cano-Vindel A, Medrano LA, Schmitz F, Ruiz-Rodríguez P, Abellán-Maeso C, et al. Utility of the PHQ-9 to identify major depressive disorder in adult patients in Spanish primary care centres. BMC Psychiatry. 2017;17(1):291. doi: 10.1186/s12888-017-1450-8.
    1. Costa PT, McCrae RR. Normal personality assessment in clinical practice: the NEO personality inventory. Psychol Assess. 1992;4(1):5–13. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.5.
    1. Aluja A. García O, Rossier J, García LF. Comparison of the NEO-FFI, the NEO-FFI-R and an alternative short version of the NEO-PI-R (NEO-60) in Swiss and Spanish samples. Pers Individ Dif. 2005;38(3):591–604. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2004.05.014.
    1. DeVellis Robert F. Classical Test Theory. Medical Care. 2006;44(Suppl 3):S50–S59. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000245426.10853.30.
    1. Caycho-Rodriguez T, Ventura-Leon J, Garcia-Cadena CH, Tomas JM, Dominguez-Vergara J, Daniel L, et al. Psychometric evidence of a brief measure of resilience in non-institutionalized Peruvian older adults. Psychosoc Interv. 2018;27(2):73–79. doi: 10.5093/pi2018a6.
    1. Finney S, DiStefano C. Non-normal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. Struct Equ Model A Second course. 2013;10(6):269–314.
    1. Hoyle RH, Gottfredson NC. Sample size considerations in prevention research applications of multilevel modeling and structural equation modeling. Prev Sci. 2015;16(7):987–996. doi: 10.1007/s11121-014-0489-8.
    1. Tanaka, JS. Multifaceted conceptions of fit in structural equation models. In Bollen KA, Long JS (Eds.) Testing structural equation models. 1993:10-40.
    1. Marsh HW, Hau K-T, Wen Z. In search of Golden rule: comment on hypothesis testing approaches to setting cutoff value for fit indexes and danger in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) finding. Struct Equ Model. 2004;11(3):320–341. doi: 10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2.
    1. Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Statistical Analysis With Latent Variables User’s Guide. 1998.
    1. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2. Hillsdale: Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
    1. Barlow DH, Sauer-Zavala S, Carl JR, Bullis JR, Ellard KK. The nature, diagnosis, and treatment of neuroticism: Back to the future. Clin Psychol Sci. 2014;2(3):344–365. doi: 10.1177/2167702613505532.
    1. Brown TA, Barlow DH. A proposal for a dimensional classification system based on the shared features of the DSM-IV anxiety and mood disorders: implications for assessment and treatment. Psychol Assess. 2009;21(3):256–271. doi: 10.1037/a0016608.
    1. McHorney CA, Tarlov AR. Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate? Qual Life Res. 1995;4(4):293–307. doi: 10.1007/BF01593882.
    1. Morris SB, DeShon RP. Combining effect size estimates in meta-analysis with repeated measures and independent-groups designs. Psychol Methods. 2002;7(1):105–125. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.105.
    1. Rubio-Aparicio M, Marín-Martínez F, Sánchez-Meca J, López-López JA. A methodological review of meta-analyses of the effectiveness of clinical psychology treatments. Behav Res Methods. 2018;50(5):2057–2073. doi: 10.3758/s13428-017-0973-8.
    1. Gilbert KE, Nolen-Hoeksema S, Gruber J. Positive emotion dysregulation across mood disorders: how amplifying versus dampening predicts emotional reactivity and illness course. Behav Res Ther. 2013;51(11):736–741. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2013.08.004.
    1. Barlow D, Allen LB, Choate ML. Toward a unified treatment for emotional disorders. Behav Ther. 2004;35:205–230. doi: 10.1016/S0005-7894(04)80036-4.
    1. Watson D, Naragon-Gainey K. On the specificity of positive emotional dysfunction in psychopathology: evidence from the mood and anxiety disorders and schizophrenia/schizotypy. Clin Psychol Rev. 2010;30(7):839–848. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2009.11.002.
    1. Kessler RC, Chiu WT, Demler O, Merikangas KR, Walters EE. Prevalence, severity, and comorbidity of 12-month DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62(6):617–627. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.62.6.617.
    1. Nunnally J, Bernstein I. Psychometric Theory 3rd edition. New York: MacGraw-Hill; 1994.
    1. Cicchetti DV. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess. 1994;6(4):284–290. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284.
    1. Andersson G, Cuijpers P. Internet-based and other computerized psychological treatments for adult depression: a meta-analysis. Cogn Behav Ther. 2009;38(4):196–205. doi: 10.1080/16506070903318960.
    1. Andrews G, Cuijpers P, Craske MG, McEvoy P, Titov N. Computer Therapy for the Anxiety and Depressive Disorders Is Effective, Acceptable and Practical Health Care: A Meta-Analysis. PLoS One. 2010;5(10):e13196. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013196.
    1. Mira A, Bretón-López J, García-Palacios A, Quero S, Baños RM, Botella C. An internet-based program for depressive symptoms using human and automated support: a randomized controlled trial. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2017;13:987–1006. doi: 10.2147/NDT.S130994.
    1. Montero-Marín J, Araya R, Pérez-Yus MC, Mayoral F, Gili M, Botella C, et al. An Internet-Based Intervention for Depression in Primary Care in Spain: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18(8):e231. doi: 10.2196/jmir.5695.
    1. Romero-Sanchiz Pablo, Nogueira-Arjona Raquel, García-Ruiz Antonio, Luciano Juan V., García Campayo Javier, Gili Margalida, Botella Cristina, Baños Rosa, Castro Adoración, López-Del-Hoyo Yolanda, Pérez Ara Mª Ángeles, Modrego-Alarcón Marta, Mayoral Cleríes Fermín. Economic evaluation of a guided and unguided internet-based CBT intervention for major depression: Results from a multi-center, three-armed randomized controlled trial conducted in primary care. PLOS ONE. 2017;12(2):e0172741. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172741.
    1. Carlbring P, Brunt S, Bohman S, Austin D, Richards J, Öst L-G, et al. Internet vs. paper and pencil administration of questionnaires commonly used in panic/agoraphobia research. Comput Human Behav. 2007;23(3):1421–1434. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2005.05.002.
    1. Hedman E, Ljótsson B, Rück C, Furmark T, Carlbring P, Lindefors N, et al. Internet administration of self-report measures commonly used in research on social anxiety disorder: a psychometric evaluation. Comput Human Behav. 2010;26(4):736–740. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.01.010.
    1. Vallejo MA, Jordán CM, Díaz MI, Comeche MI, Ortega J. Psychological assessment via the internet: a reliability and validity study of online (vs paper-and-pencil) versions of the general health Questionnaire-28 (GHQ-28) and the symptoms check-List-90-revised (SCL-90-R) J Med Internet Res. 2007;9(1):1–10. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9.1.e2.
    1. Barak A, English N. Prospects and limitations of psychological testing on the internet. J Technol Hum Serv. 2002;19(2–3):65–89. doi: 10.1300/J017v19n02_06.
    1. Quadri N, Wild D, Skerritt B, Muehlhausen W, O'Donohoe P. A literature review of the variance in interval length between administrations for assessment of test retest reliability and equivalence of pro measures. Value Health. 2013;16(3):A40–A41. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.03.230.
    1. Terwee CB, Bot SDM, de Boer MR, van der Windt DAWM, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren