Independence and bipolarity in the structure of current affect.
Abstract
The independence of positive and negative affect has been heralded as a major and counterintuitive finding in the psychology of mood and emotion. Still, other findings support the older view that positive and negative fall at opposite ends of a single bipolar continuum. Independence versus bipolarity can be reconciled by considering (a) the activation dimension of affect, (b) random and systematic measurement error, and (c) how items are selected to achieve an appropriate test of bipolarity. In 3 studies of self-reported current affect, random and systematic error were controlled through multiformat measurement and confirmatory factor analysis. Valence was found to be independent of activation, positive affect the bipolar opposite of negative affect, and deactivation the bipolar opposite of activation. The dimensions underlying D. Watson, L. A. Clark, and A. Tellegen's (1988) Positive and Negative Affect schedule were accounted for by the valence and activation dimensions. A consensus on a descriptive structure of current affect is at hand—if we can only agree on what the structure is. The psychology of mood, emotion, and affect needs a consensual structure and is tantalizingly close to achieving one. Among the remaining disagreements, the most puzzling and persistent is bipolarity versus independence. Is positive affect the bipolar opposite of, or is it independent of, negative affect? Are happiness and sadness two ends of one continuum, or separate entities, like apples and oranges? A resolution to this puzzle is needed to answer questions about the number of dimensions of affect, how affect should be measured, and the underlying processes involved. Despite repeated attempts, a solution to this puzzle remains elusive, and a long-simmering debate has recently flared up. Much is at stake in this debate, for important lines of research have arisen on these opposing assumptions. This article offers conceptual and empirical analyses aimed at resolving the dispute.
Cites (12)
- Comparative fit indexes in structural models.Bentler, P. M. · 1990 · Psychological Bulletin
- Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.P. M. Bentler, Douglas G. Bonett · 1980 · Psychological Bulletin
- A circumplex model of affect.Russell, James A. · 1980 · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
- The Cognitive Structure of EmotionsOrtony, Andrew, Clore, Gerald L., Collins, Allan · 1988
- Looking at pictures: Affective, facial, visceral, and behavioral reactionsLANG, PETER J., GREENWALD, MARK K., BRADLEY, MARGARET M., HAMM, ALFONS O. · 1993 · Psychophysiology
- Affect Grid: A single-item scale of pleasure and arousal.Russell, James A., Weiss, Anna, Mendelsohn, Gerald A. · 1989 · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
- Evidence for a three-factor theory of emotionsRussell, James A, Mehrabian, Albert · 1977 · Journal of Research in Personality
- Relationship between attitudes and evaluative space: A critical review, with emphasis on the separability of positive and negative substrates.Cacioppo, John T., Berntson, Gary G. · 1994 · Psychological Bulletin
- Happiness Is a Stochastic PhenomenonLykken, David, Tellegen, Auke · 1996 · Psychological Science
- Duration neglect in retrospective evaluations of affective episodes.Fredrickson, Barbara L., Kahneman, Daniel · 1993 · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Cited by (83)
- Ecological momentary assessmentShiffman, Saul, Stone, Arthur A., Hufford, Michael R. · 2008 · Annual Review of Clinical Psychology
- Nature and Operation of AttitudesAjzen, Icek · 2001 · Annual Review of Psychology
- The Role of Emotions in MarketingBagozzi, R. P., Gopinath, M., Nyer, P. U. · 1999 · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
- What Makes Online Content Viral?Berger, Jonah, Milkman, Katherine L. · 2012 · Journal of Marketing Research
- The circumplex model of affect: An integrative approach to affective neuroscience, cognitive development, and psychopathologyPOSNER, JONATHAN, RUSSELL, JAMES A., PETERSON, BRADLEY S. · 2005 · Development and Psychopathology
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Independence and bipolarity in the structure of current affect. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037//0022-3514.74.4.967
- The paper
- Barrett, L. F., & Russell, J. A. (1998). Independence and bipolarity in the structure of current affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.74.4.967
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.