Further considerations regarding PANAS: Contributions from four studies with different Argentinean samples

Fiche du document

Date

1 décembre 2018

Discipline
Type de document
Périmètre
Langue
Identifiant
Relations

Ce document est lié à :
10.14349/sumapsi.2018.v25.n2.5

Organisation

SciELO

Licence

info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess



Sujets proches En

Pattern Model

Citer ce document

Estefanía Caicedo-Cavagnis et al., « Further considerations regarding PANAS: Contributions from four studies with different Argentinean samples », Suma Psicológica, ID : 10670/1.8rksf0


Métriques


Partage / Export

Résumé 0

In this research we analyzed the psychometric properties of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) in samples coming from four independent studies: university students (Study 1, n = 392; Study 2, n = 395), general adult population (Study 3, n = 316), and athletes (Study 4, n = 533). Through confirmatory analyses we evaluated the following models: (a) two-factor model (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988), (b) three-factor model by Mehrabian (1997), (c) three-factor model by Gaudreau, Sánchez and Blondin (2006) and (d) bi-factor model (Leue & Beauducel, 2011), all of them in their oblique and orthogonal variants. Several models presented an acceptable fit, but only after allowing correlated errors and excluding the items alert and excited. While orthogonal solutions of the three models showed the best fit in Studies 2, 3 and 4, oblique solutions presented the best fit in Study 1. Cronbach's alpha, composite reliability and omega indexes oscillated between .55 and .89. Considering the original theoretical model and the practical utility of the PANAS, we favor the model of two orthogonal factors, excluding the aforementioned items.

document thumbnail

Par les mêmes auteurs

Sur les mêmes sujets

Sur les mêmes disciplines

Exporter en