Factor analysis of the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List: A separation of positive and negative affect.

Abstract

This questionnaire study of rape victims' reactions, causal attributions for the rape, coping behaviors after the rape, and psychological adjustment to the rape were examined. As in previous research, high levels of behavioral and characterological self-blame for rape were found. Contrary to prior hypotheses, behavioral self-blame was not associated with good adjustment. Rather, both behavioral and characterological self-blame were associated with poor adjustment. Societal blame was the only causal attribution for rape that was unassociated with adjustment. Remaining at home and withdrawing from others were both associated with poor adjustment, and the use of stress reduction techniques was associated with good adjustment. The implications of the results for theories of victimization and for clinical interventions with rape victims are discussed.

The Japanese version of the Multiple Affect Adjective Checklist—Revised: Development and validation

“…This factor structure was strikingly similar to the two basic dimensions of human affect (i.e., positive and negative affect) (Watson et al, 1984;Watson & Tellegen, 1985) that also is replicated in the Japanese culture (Watson et al, 1984). Furthermore, it is consistent with the findings of the previous factor analysis on the original version of the MAACL (Zuckerman & Lubin, 1965) conducted by Goltib and Meyer (1986). They found two robust factors that represented positive and negative human affect, as measured by MAACL.…”

Response Styles in Affect Ratings: Making a Mountain Out of a Molehill

“…Second, Warr, Barter, and Brownbridge (1983) already demonstrated that checklists produce weaker negative correlations than rating scales for reasons other than response styles. As noted by Gotlib and Meyer (1986), for assessments of PA and UA over extended time frames "it is reasonable to expect that an individual would have experienced independent episodes of positive and negative affect" (p. 1163). As Green et al (1993) used a time frame of at least a couple of hours, their findings are inconclusive with regard to the influence of response styles on checklists (Gotlib & Meyer, 1986;Warr et al, 1983).…”

Research in stress, coping, and health: theoretical and methodological issues

“…For example, phasic changes in cardiovascular and electrodermal activity may indicate changes in general physiological arousal rather than distinct physiological outcomes. Similarly, multiple measures of mood may simply reflect positive and negative affect rather than separate psychological dimensions (Gotlib & Meyer, 1986). Secondly, interrelationships among health indices may reflect causal relationships among these variables.…”