The positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS): construct validity, measurement properties and normative data in a large non-clinical sample.

By John R. Crawford, Julie D. Henry. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 2004

3,025 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/06ee8b438d144c5db1f722f5143ecaaef63bcd46

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Principles and Practice of Scaled Difference Chi-Square Testing (2012, methodology): “In addition, available macro programs that compute scaled difference chi-square values using ML and SB chi-square values alone as input (eg, Crawford & Henry, 2004 ; see SBDIFF.”
Introducing the RECOLA multimodal corpus of remote collaborative and affective interactions (2013, methodology): “Participants also evaluated the mood of their teammate at the end of the task using the SAMs, and their emotion using the positive and negative affective schedule (PANAS) [32].”
RESPONSE TO ASSESSMENT FEEDBACK: THE EFFECTS OF GRADES, PRAISE, AND SOURCE OF INFORMATION (2008, background): “High positive affect was indicative of high arousal, and high negative affect was indicative of depression and behavior inhibition (Crawford & Henry, 2004).”
The Affective Tipping Point: Do Motivated Reasoners Ever “Get It”? (2010, background): “Previous studies have shown the NA scale itself to be a good measure of anxious states (Crawford and Henry, 2004; Mehrabian, 1997) and it is widely used in social psychology.”
Differences in the Between–Person and Within–Person Structures of Affect Are A Matter of Degree (2015, background): “Also, allowing for a correlation between PA and NA and for residual correlations among PANAS items that originally belonged to different content domains1 was shown to improve model fit (e.g., Crawford & Henry, 2004).”
Development and Validation of an Internationally Reliable Short-Form of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) (2007, methodology): “However, validation studies using structural equation modeling (Crawford & Hendry, 2004; Crocker, 1997) have found that best-fitting models are achieved by specifying correlations between error in items that come from the same word clusters that formed the item pool from which the PANAS was…”
The short-form version of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21): construct validity and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. (2005, methodology): “The PANAS is a 20-item self-report measure of positive affect and negative affect that has been found to be a valid, reliable measure of these constructs ( Crawford & Henry, 2004; Watson et al., 1988).”
Experience-Sampling Research Methods and Their Potential for Education Research (2015, methodology): “Participants’ overall affective state “in the moment” was measured through a short version of a well-validated scale, such as the Positive and Negative Affect Survey (Crawford & Henry, 2004).”
Positive emotion in sport performance: current status and future directions (2011, methodology): “…positive emotional states is called positive affectivity and it can be reliably assessed using the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (Watson et al., 1988); however, the complete independence between positive and negative affect is rejected (Crawford & Henry, 2004; Watson et al., 1988).”
A process model of self-regulation and leadership: How attentional resource capacity and negative emotions influence constructive and destructive leadership (2015, result): “Finally, while ourmeasure of self-regulationmight be impervious to self-response inflation, self-reportmeasures of negative emotion are not and can result in non-normal data that might confound the interpretation of results (e.g., Crawford & Henry, 2004; Dobson, 2000).”
Putting the ‘app’ in Happiness: A Randomised Controlled Trial of a Smartphone-Based Mindfulness Intervention to Enhance Wellbeing (2016, methodology): “This measure is widely used in psychological research given its high test–retest reliability and levels of internal consistency (a = .89 for PA, a = .85 for NA; Crawford and Henry 2004).”