Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparing static and dynamic measures of affect intensity and affective lability: do they measure the same thing?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Motivation and Emotion Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This was the first study to our knowledge to examine whether dispositional scales of affect intensity and affective lability map on to corresponding momentary affective dynamics. Specifically, we assessed whether the Affect Intensity Measure (AIM) and Affective Lability Scale (ALS) are differentially associated with mean, variability, and instability of negative affect (NA) and positive affect (PA). Young adults (n = 135) completed the AIM, ALS, and 7 days of experience sampling assessments. Higher scores on the AIM were associated with variability and instability of NA and PA whereas the ALS was associated with mean levels of NA and PA. Neither the AIM nor the ALS were associated with reactivity to stressful, negative, or positive experiences in the moment. The AIM and ALS accounted for little variance in momentary affective dynamics and effects were generally small. Findings highlighted that static measures of dynamic phenomena poorly map onto momentary measures of affect in daily life. Theoretical and methodological implications are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data will be made publicly available via Open Science Framework and can be accessed via the following https://osf.io/d2vnm/?view_only=1ab9c970649b48668d4aadb2af4a8d3d.

References

  • Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, L. J., & Chapman, J. P. (1983). Infrequency scale for personality measures. Unpublished scale available from T. R. Kwapil, UIUC Department of Psychology, Champaign, IL

  • Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dejonckheere, E., Mestdagh, M., Houben, M., Ruttsen, I., Sels, L., Kuppens, P., et al. (2019). Complex affect dynamics add limited information to the prediction of psychological well-being. Nature Human Behaviour, 3(5), 478–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.48.5.1253.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, L. J., Muller, K. E., Wolfinger, R. D., Qaqish, B. F., & Schabenberger, O. (2008). An R2 statistic for fixed effects in the linear mixed model. Statistics in Medicine, 27(29), 6137–6157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eid, M., & Diener, E. (1999). Intraindividual variability in affect: Reliability, validity, and personality correlates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(4), 662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, P. D., Greenberg, B. R., & Serper, M. R. (1989). The affective lability scales: development, reliability, and validity. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 45(5), 786–793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heck, R. H., & Thomas, S. L. (2015). An introduction to multilevel modeling. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Henry, C., Van den Bulke, D., Bellivier, F., Roy, I., Swendsen, J., M'Baïlara, K., ... & Leboyer, M. (2008). Affective lability and affect intensity as core dimensions of bipolar disorders during euthymic period. Psychiatry Research, 159(1–2), 1–6

  • Izard, C. E., Libero, D. Z., Putnam, P., & Haynes, O. M. (1993). Stability of emotion experiences and their relations to traits of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(5), 847.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jahng, S., Wood, P. K., & Trull, T. J. (2008). Analysis of affective instability in ecological momentary assessment: Indices using successive difference and group comparison via multilevel modeling. Psychological Methods. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014173.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Koval, P., Brose, A., Pe, M. L., Houben, M., Erbas, Y., Champagne, D., et al. (2015). Emotional inertia and external events: The roles of exposure, reactivity, and recovery. Emotion, 15(5), 625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuppens, P. (2015). It’s about time: A special section on affect dynamics. Emotion Review, 7(4), 297–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073915590947.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwapil, T. R., Barrantes-Vidal, N., Armistead, M. S., Hope, G. A., Brown, L. H., Silvia, P. J., et al. (2011). The expression of bipolar spectrum psychopathology in daily life. Journal of Affective Disorders, 130(1–2), 166–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.201.1.025.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, R. J. (1985). Theory and measurement of affect intensity as an individual difference characteristic. ProQuest Information & Learning.

  • Larsen, R. J. (1987). The stability of mood variability: A spectral analytic approach to daily mood assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(6), 1195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, R. J., Augustine, A. A., & Prizmic, Z. (2009). A process approach to emotion and personality: Using time as a facet of data. Cognition and Emotion, 23(7), 1407–1426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, R. J., & Diener, E. (1987). Affect intensity as an individual difference characteristic: A review. Journal of Research in Personality, 21(1), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(87)90023-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, R. J., Diener, E., & Emmons, R. A. (1986). Affect intensity and reactions to daily life events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(4), 803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, M. D. (2005). Bridging emotion theory and neurobiology through dynamic systems modeling. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28(2), 169–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Look, A. E., Flory, J. D., Harvey, P. D., & Siever, L. J. (2010). Psychometric properties of a short form of the Affective Lability Scale (ALS-18). Personality and Individual Differences, 49(3), 187–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mroczek, D. K., Spiro, A., & Almeida, D. M. (2003). Between-and within-person variation in affect and personality over days and years: How basic and applied approaches can inform one another. Ageing International, 28(3), 260–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myin-Germeys, I., Peeters, F., Havermans, R., Nicolson, N., DeVries, M., Delespaul, P., et al. (2003). Emotional reactivity to daily life stress in psychosis and affective disorder: An experience sampling study. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 107(2), 124–131. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0447.2003.02025.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, M. N. I., & Simons, J. S. (2004). The affective lability scales: Development of a short-form measure. Personality and Individual Differences, 37(6), 1279–1288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2003.12.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Page-Gould, E. (2017). Multilevel modeling. In J. T. Cacioppo, L. G. Tassinary, & G. G. Berntson (Eds.), Cambridge handbooks in psychology: Handbook of psychophysiology (pp. 662–678). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pishva, E., Drukker, M., Viechtbauer, W., Decoster, J., Collip, D., … Van Winkel, R., et al. (2014). Epigenetic genes and emotional reactivity to daily life events: A multi-step gene-environment interaction study. PLoS ONE, 9(6), e100935.

  • R Core Team (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. URL https://www.R-project.org/.

  • Russell, J. A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(6), 1161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, J. A. (2003). Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychological Review, 110(1), 145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, K. R. (2000). Emotions as episodes of subsystem synchronization driven by nonlinear appraisal processes. Emotion, Development, and Self-Organization: Dynamic Systems Approaches to Emotional Development, 7099.

  • Schimmack, U. (2003). Affect measurement in experience sampling research. Journal of Happiness Studies, 4(1), 79–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schimmack, U., & Diener, E. (1997). Affect intensity: Separating intensity and frequency in repeatedly measured affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(6), 1313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siever, L. J., & Davis, K. L. (1991). A psychobiological perspective on the personality disorders. The American Journal of Psychiatry., 148(12), 1647–1658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sperry, S. H., & Kwapil, T. R. (2017). What can daily life assessment tell us about the bipolar spectrum? Psychiatry Research, 252, 51–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2017.02.045.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sperry, S. H., Walsh, M. A., & Kwapil, T. R. (2020). Emotion dynamics concurrently and prospectively predict mood psychopathology. Journal of Affective Disorders, 261, 67–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sperry, S. H., & Kwapil, T. R. (2020). Bipolar spectrum psychopathology is associated with altered emotion dynamics across multiple timescales. Emotion. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000759.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, R. J., Berenbaum, H., & Bredemeier, K. (2011). Cross-sectional and longitudinal relations between affective instability and depression. Journal of Affective Disorders, 130(1), 53–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trafford, E. (2015). MetricWire. Retrieved from https://www.research.metricwire.com

  • Trull, T. J., Solhan, M. B., Tragesser, S. L., Jahng, S., Wood, P. K., Piasecki, T. M., et al. (2008). Affective instability: measuring a core feature of borderline personality disorder with ecological momentary assessment. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117(3), 647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, M. A., Royal, A., Brown, L. H., Barrantes-Vidal, N., & Kwapil, T. R. (2012). Looking for bipolar spectrum psychopathology: identification and expression in daily life. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 53(5), 409–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2011.06.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D., & Tellegen, A. (1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98(2), 219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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(6), 1063.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, A. G., & Hopwood, C. J. (2016). Advancing the assessment of dynamic psychological processes. Assessment, 23(4), 399–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, L. P., Wright, A. G., Pilkonis, P. A., Woods, W. C., Denissen, J., Kühnel, A., & Zimmermann, J. (2019, April 17). Indicators of affect dynamics: Structure, reliability, and personality correlates. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/nyqst.

  • Zelkowitz, R. L., & Cole, D. A. (2016). Measures of emotion reactivity and emotion regulation: Convergent and discriminant validity. Personality and Individual Differences, 102, 123–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.045.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Zinbarg, R. E., Revelle, W., Yovel, I., & Li, W. (2005). Cronbach’s α, Revelle’s β, and McDonald’s ω H: Their relations with each other and two alternative conceptualizations of reliability. Psychometrika, 70(1), 123–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge Christopher G. Mayne for contributing scripts to synthesize study data.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, 61820, USA

    Sarah H. Sperry & Thomas R. Kwapil

  2. University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, USA

    Thomas R. Kwapil

Authors
  1. Sarah H. Sperry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas R. Kwapil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah H. Sperry.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 18 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sperry, S.H., Kwapil, T.R. Comparing static and dynamic measures of affect intensity and affective lability: do they measure the same thing?. Motiv Emot 44, 870–879 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-020-09840-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-020-09840-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation