The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Affectometer 2: A scale to measure current level of general happiness
Abstract
Affectometer 2 is a 5-minute inventory of general happiness or sense of well-being based on measuring the balance of positive and negative feelings in recent experience. Since this scale is directly derived from its parent scale, Affectometer 1, psychometric findings on the longer scale are reported along with initial data on Affectometer 2. These results indicate high reliability, high validity, and slight contamination by current mood and social desirability. Among the findings of special interest are: (a) the independence of positive and negative affect proposed by Bradburn is not confirmed; (b) well-being is highly and inversely related to neuroticism, anxiety, depression and somatic complaints; (c) the relationship of well-being to depression is curvilinear; (d) well-being scores are determined more by short-term states than long-term traits; (e) well-being can be characterized by 10 “qualities of happiness”.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- 10.1007/BF00302506 · DOI
- Bradburn N. L., 1969, The structure of psychological well-being
- Campbell A., 1976, The quality of American life
- Coan R. W., 1974, The optimal personality
- Fazio A. F., 1977, A concurrent validational study of the NCHS general well-being schedule
- Kammann R., 1979, New Zealand Psychologist, 8, 1
- Lichter S., 1980, New Zealand Psychologist, 9, 57
- 10.1037/h0021906 · DOI
Cited by
Diener, E. (1984) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.542 · Cited by 11,023
The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS): development and UK validation
Tennant, R., Hiller, L., Fishwick, R., Platt, S., Joseph, S., Weich, S., Parkinson, J., Secker, J., & Stewart-Brown, S. (2007) · Health and Quality of Life Outcomes · doi:10.1186/1477-7525-5-63 · Cited by 5,031
“The starting point for the development of this scale was the Affectometer 2 [19], a scale developed in New Zealand in the 1980s which aimed to measure well-being and had intuitive appeal to those working in mental health promotion in the UK, because it covered both eudemonic and hedonic aspects of mental health and ha…”
BackgroundExtensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1983) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.90.4.293 · Cited by 3,991
Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment.
Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002) · Heuristics and Biases · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.004 · Cited by 3,476
Slovic, P., Finucane, M., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2002) · Heuristics and Biases · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.025 · Cited by 2,349
Metadata
- Authors
- Kammann, R., & Flett, R.
- Venue
- Australian Journal of Psychology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1983-08-01
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 259-265
- ISSN
- 0004-9530 (ISSN-L)
- 1742-9536
- OpenAlex
- W2061396870
- Cited by
- 490
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1 (tdm)
- onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 10047 d)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Affectometer 2: A scale to measure current level of general happiness. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/00049538308255070
- The paper
- Kammann, R., & Flett, R. (1983). Affectometer 2: A scale to measure current level of general happiness. Australian Journal of Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049538308255070
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.
