Differences in the Between–Person and Within–Person Structures of Affect Are A Matter of Degree

Abstract

This study tested whether the structure of affect observed on the basis of between-person (BP) differences is equivalent to the affect structures that organize the variability of affective states within persons (WP) over time. Further aims were to identify individual differences in the degree of divergence between the WP and BP structure and examine its association to dispositional and contextual variables (neuroticism, extraversion, well-being and stress). In 100 daily sessions, 101 younger adults rated their mood on the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule. Variability of five negative affect items across time was so low that they were excluded from the analyses. We thus worked with a modified negative affect subscale. WP affect structures diverged reliably from the BP structure, with individual differences in the degree of divergence. Differences in the WP structural characteristics and the degree of divergence could be predicted by well-being and stress. We conclude that BP and WP structures of affect are not equivalent and that BP and WP variation should be considered as distinct phenomena. It would be wrong, for example, to conceive of positive and negative affect as independent at the WP level, as suggested by BP findings. Yet, individual differences in WP structural characteristics are related to stable BP differences, and the degree to which individuals' affect structures diverge from the BP structure can provide important insights into intraindividual functioning.

The daily dynamics of loss orientation and life engagement in advanced cancer: A pilot study to characterise patterns of adaptation at the end of life

“…Our findings correspond to those of Chochinov et al (1999), who have shown that psychological variables can fluctuate considerably in terminally ill individuals. This heterogeneity is consistent with earlier findings in non-cancer populations that have shown a substantial range of how negative affect can fluctuate and co-vary with positive affect across persons (Brose, Voelkle, Lövdén, Lindenberger, & Schmiedek, 2015;Hülür, Hoppmann, Ram, & Gerstorf, 2015;Kuppens, Oravecz, & Tuerlinckx, 2010). This heterogeneity is consistent with earlier findings in non-cancer populations that have shown a substantial range of how negative affect can fluctuate and co-vary with positive affect across persons (Brose, Voelkle, Lövdén, Lindenberger, & Schmiedek, 2015;Hülür, Hoppmann, Ram, & Gerstorf, 2015;Kuppens, Oravecz, & Tuerlinckx, 2010).…”

“…Moreover, the present data suggest relative stability for some participants, while others experienced frequent and/or extensive changes in loss and life orientations, and that those changes co-fluctuated in different ways across individuals. This heterogeneity is consistent with earlier findings in non-cancer populations that have shown a substantial range of how negative affect can fluctuate and co-vary with positive affect across persons (Brose, Voelkle, Lövdén, Lindenberger, & Schmiedek, 2015;Hülür, Hoppmann, Ram, & Gerstorf, 2015;Kuppens, Oravecz, & Tuerlinckx, 2010). Combining for each patient information about the mean level, fluctuation and co-fluctuation of orientations may help to convey the variation that exists in how individuals shift focus between loss orientation and life engagement.…”

Are we on the same page? Latent variable modeling suggests different nomothetic and idiographic factor structures for momentary affect

“…Based on that measure, they construct likelihood planes which allows identifying the source of variation accountable for any kind of (partial) factorial nonequivalence. Finally, Brose, Voelkle, Lövdén, Lindenberger, and Schmiedek (2015) investigated positive and negative affects in the 100-day daily diaries of 101 younger adult participants of the COGITO Study (Schmiedek, Lövdén, & Lindenberger, 2010). They report noticeable divergence of individual WP constructs from the shared BP DFM.…”

Capturing Context-Related Change in Emotional Dynamics via Fixed Moderated Time Series Analysis

“…Such a bottom-up approach seems appropriate in cases of extreme inter-individual differences, when aggregations across individuals must remain on a descriptive, informal level by virtue of the phenomenon under study. This is of course an extreme case and it has been argued that heterogeneity should be considered a gradual feature rather than an all-ornone situation (Brose, Voelkle, Lövdén, Lindenberger, & Schmiedek, 2015;Voelkle, Brose, Schmiedek, & Lindenberger, 2014). It may well be that individuals indeed share certain characteristics, hence, comprise a somewhat unified population.…”