Skip to main content
Log in

The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory: Shadows and Lights on its Construct Validity

  • Published:
Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Past studies on the factor validity of the Trait subscale of the Spielberger’s State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-T) do unanimously agree on its structure. In fact, researchers are still debating whether the STAI-T is unidimensional or multidimensional. Our aim was to clarify what the STAI-T measures. The STAI-T, the Beck Depression Inventory–II, the Teate Depression Inventory, and the Beck Anxiety Inventory were administered to 1124 psychiatric outpatients and to 877 healthy subjects. A confirmatory factor analysis was performed in order to compare various models in the literature. The internal consistency and convergent and discriminant validity of the STAI-T as well as its factorial subscales were assessed. The one-construct two-method (i.e., the STAI-T measures one substantive anxiety construct plus artifacts due to negative–positive item polarity) and the bifactor (i.e., the STAI-T comprises two first-order specific factors [“Anxiety” and “Depression”] and one first-order general factor) models were the best-fitting solutions for the STAI–T in both the clinical and nonclinical samples. The STAI–T total score correlated more strongly with measures of depression than with a concurrent measure of anxiety. The STAI-T should be considered a measure of general negative affect, including specific aspects of cognitive anxiety and depression together.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrich, D. (1995). Models for measurement, precision, and the nondichotomization of graded responses. Psychometrika, 60, 7–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antony, M. M., & Barlow, D. H. (2010). Handbook of assessment and treatment planning for psychological disorders (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antony, M. M., & Rowa, K. (2005). Evidence-based assessment of anxiety disorders in adults. Psychological Assessment, 17(3), 256–266. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.17.3.256.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bados, A., Gomez-Benito, J., & Balaguer, G. (2010). The state-trait anxiety inventory, trait version: does it really measure anxiety? Journal of Personality Assessment, 92(6), 560–567. doi:10.1080/00223891.2010.513295.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Balsamo, M. (2006). Costruzione di un nuovo strumento self-report di depressione. [Construction of a new Italian depression self-report instrument]. Ph.D. thesis, Università “G. D’Annunzio” di Chieti-Pescara, Chieti.

  • Balsamo, M., & Saggino, A. (2007). Test per l’assessment della depressione nel contesto italiano: un’analisi critica. [Tests for the assessment of depression in Italian Context: a critical review]. Psicoterapia Cognitiva e Comportamentale, 13, 167–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balsamo, M., & Saggino, A. (in press). TDI- Teate Depression Inventory- Manuale [TDI- Teate Depression Inventory-Manual]. Bern: Hoegrefe.

  • Barnette, J. J. (2000). Effects of stem and Likert response option reversals on survey international consistency: if you feel the need, there is a better alternative to using those negatively worded stems. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 361–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartz, A. E. (1999). Basic statistical concepts (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, A. T. (1967). Depression: clinical, experimental, and theoretical aspects. New York: Hoeber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, A. T., & Steer, R. A. (1993). Manual for the beck anxiety inventory. San Antonio: The Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K. (1996). Manual for the beck depression inventory-II. San Antonio: Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson, J., & Hocevar, D. (1985). The impact of item phrasing on the validity of attitude scales for elementary school children. Journal of Educational Measurement, 22, 231–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, I. H., & Eveland, D. C. (1982). State vs. trait anxiety: a case study in confirmatory factor analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 3, 361–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bieling, P. J., Antony, M. M., & Swinson, R. P. (1998). The state-trait anxiety inventory, trait version: structure and content re-examined. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 36(7–8), 777–788.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. A., Campbell, L. A., Lehman, C. L., Grisham, J. R., & Mancill, R. B. (2001). Current and lifetime comorbidity of the DSM-IV anxiety and mood disorders in a large clinical sample. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 110(4), 585–599.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. W., & Cudek, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In J. S. Long (Ed.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bufka, L. F., Crawford, J. I., & Levitt, J. T. (2002). Brief screening assessments for managed care and primary care. In M. M. Antony & D. H. Barlow (Eds.), Handbook of assessment and treatment planning for psychological disorders (pp. 38–66). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caci, H., Bayle, F. J., Dossios, C., Robert, P., & Boyer, P. (2003). The Spielberger trait anxiety inventory measures more than anxiety. European Psychiatry, 18(8), 394–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–105.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cattell, R. B., & Scheier, I. H. (1961). The meaning and measurement of neuroticism and anxiety. New York: Ronald.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, F. F., West, S. G., & Sousa, K. H. (2006). A comparison of bifactor and second-order models of quality of life. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 41, 189–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1991). Tripartite model of anxiety and depression: psychometric evidence and taxonomic implications. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100(3), 316–336.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281–302.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deyo, R. A., & Carter, W. B. (1992). Strategies for improving and expanding the application of health status measures in clinical settings. A researcher-developer viewpoint. Medical Care, 30(5 Suppl), MS176–186.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dobson, K. S. (1985a). An analysis of anxiety and depression scales. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(5), 522–527. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4905_10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dobson, K. S. (1985b). The relationship between anxiety and depression. Clinical Psychology Review, 5, 307–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dozois, D. J. A., & Dobson, K. S. (2002). Depression. In M. M. Antony & D. H. Barlow (Eds.), Handbook of assessment and treatment planning for psychological disorders (pp. 259–299). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eid, M., Lischetzke, T., & Nussbeck, F. W. (2006). Structural equation models for multitrait-multimethod data. In M. Eid & E. Diener (Eds.), Handbook of multimethod measurement in psychology (1st ed., pp. 283–299). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Endler, N. S., & Kocovski, N. L. (2001). State and trait anxiety revisited. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 15(3), 231–245.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1982). Culture and personality abnormalities. In I. Al-Issa (Ed.), Culture and psychopathology (pp. 277–389). Baltimore: University Park Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • First, M. B. (2011). DSM-5 proposals for mood disorders: a cost-benefit analysis. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 24(1), 1–9. doi:10.1097/YCO.0b013e328340b594.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • First, M. B., Spitzer, R. L., Gibbon, M., & Williams, J. B. W. (1996). Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders, Clinician Version (SCID-CV). Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • First, M. B., Spitzer, R. L., Gibbon, M., & Williams, J. B. W. (2002). Structured clinical interview for DSM-IV-TR axis I disorders, research version, patient edition, SCID-I/P. New York: Biometrics Research, New York State Psychiatric Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaudry, E. G., Vagg, P., & Spielberger, C. D. (1975). Validation of the state-trait distinction in anxiety research. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 10, 331–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gauthier, J., & Bouchard, S. (1993). Adaptation canadienne-française de la forme révisée du State–Trait Anxiety Inventory de Spielberger. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 25, 559–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gotlib, I. H. (1984). Depression and general psychopathology in university students. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 93(1), 19–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gros, D. F., Antony, M. M., Simms, L. J., & McCabe, R. E. (2007). Psychometric properties of the State-Trait Inventory for Cognitive and Somatic Anxiety (STICSA): comparison to the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Psychological Assessment, 19(4), 369–381. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.19.4.369.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hathaway, S. R., & McKinley, J. C. (1989). MMPI-2: Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2: Manual for administration and scoring. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hishinuma, E. S., Miyamoto, R. H., Nishimura, S. T., Nahulu, L. B., Andrade, N. N., Makini, G. K., Jr., & Guerrero, A. P. (2000). Psychometric properties of the state-trait anxiety inventory for Asian/Pacific-islander adolescents. Assessment, 7(1), 17–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hodapp, V., & Benson, J. (1997). The multidimensionality of test anxiety: a test of different models. Anxiety, Stress & Coping, 10(3), 219–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holtzman, W. H. (1976). Critique of research on anxiety across cultures. In C. D. Spielberger, R. Díaz Guerrero, & J. Strelau (Eds.), Cross-cultural anxiety (pp. 175–187). Washington, DC: Hemisphere Pub. Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: a Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Innamorati, M., Lelli, M., Aiello, S., Di Lorenzo del Casale, F. L., Russo, S., & V., F. (2006). Validazione convergente e discriminante della versione italiana della Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale. [Convergent and discriminant validation of the Italian version of the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale]. Psicoterapia Cognitiva e Comportamentale, 12, 343–353.

  • Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (2006). LISREL for Windows [Computer software]. Lincolnwood: Scientific Software International, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, J. H. (2006). Factor analysis in counseling psychology research, training, and practice: principles, advances, and applications. The Counseling Psychologist, 34, 684–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keedwell, P., & Snaith, R. P. (1996). What do anxiety scales measure? Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 93(3), 177–180.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, B. L., Schwab, J. J., Morris, R. L., & Beldia, G. (2001). Assessment of state and trait anxiety in subjects with anxiety and depressive disorders. The Psychiatric Quarterly, 72(3), 263–276.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohn, P. M., Kantor, L., DeCicco, T. L., & Beck, A. T. (2008). The Beck Anxiety Inventory-Trait (BAIT): a measure of dispositional anxiety not contaminated by dispositional depression. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90(5), 499–506. doi:10.1080/00223890802248844.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Koksal, F., & Power, K. G. (1990). Four Systems Anxiety Questionnaire (FSAQ): a self-report measure of somatic, cognitive, behavioral, and feeling components. Journal of Personality Assessment, 54(3–4), 534–545. doi:10.1080/00223891.1990.9674018.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Köksal, F., Power, K., & Sharp, D. (1991). Profiles of DSM III anxiety disorders on the somatic, cognitive, behavioural and feeling components of the four systems anxiety questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 643–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovibond, P. F., & Lovibond, S. H. (1995). Manual for the depression anxiety stress scales. Sidney: Psychology Foundation of Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W. (1996). Positive and negative global self-esteem: a substantively meaningful distinction or artifactors? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(4), 810–819.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meng, X. L., Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1992). Comparing correlated correlation coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 111(1), 172–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, T. R., & Clearly, T. A. (1993). Direction of wording effects in balanced scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 51–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Motl, R. W., Conroy, D. E., & Horan, P. M. (2000). The Social Physique Anxiety Scale: an example of the potential consequence of negatively worded items in factorial validity studies. Journal of Applied Measurement, 1(4), 327–345.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nezu, A. M., Nezu, C. M., McClure, K. S., & Zwick, M. L. (2002). Assessment of depression. In I. H. Gotlib & C. L. Hammen (Eds.), Handbook of depression (pp. 61–85). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olino, T. M., Klein, D. N., Lewinsohn, P. M., Rohde, P., & Seeley, J. R. (2008). Longitudinal associations between depressive and anxiety disorders: a comparison of two trait models. Psychological Medicine, 38(3), 353–363. doi:10.1017/S0033291707001341.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pilotte, W. J., & Gable, R. K. (1990). The impact of positive and negative item stems on the validity of a computer anxiety scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 50, 603–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasch, G. (1980). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests (Expandedth ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ree, M. J., French, D. J., Macleod, C., & Locke, V. M. (2008). Distinguishing Cognitive and Somatic Dimensions of State and Trait Anxiety: Development and Validation of the State-Trait Inventory for Cognitive and Somatic Anxiety (STICSA). Behavioural and Cognitive Psychoterapy, 36(3), 313–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: test of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholing, A., & Emmelkamp, P. M. (1992). Self report assessment of anxiety: a cross validation of the Lehrer Woolfolk Anxiety Symptom Questionnaire in three populations. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 30(5), 521–531.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schriesheim, C. A., Eisenback, R. J., & Hill, K. D. (1991). The effect of negation and polar opposite item reversals on questionnaire reliability and validity: an experimental investigation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 51, 67–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, G. E., Davidson, R. J., & Goleman, D. J. (1978). Patterning of cognitive and somatic processes in the self-regulation of anxiety: effects of meditation versus exercise. Psychosomatic Medicine, 40(4), 321–328.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shedletsky, R., & Endler, N. S. (1974). Anxiety: the state-trait model and the interaction model. Journal of Personality, 42(4), 511–527.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shek, D. T. (1988). Reliability and factorial structure of the Chinese version of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 10, 303–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, G. T. (2005). On construct validity: issues of method and measurement. Psychological Assessment, 17(4), 396–408.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Snaith, P. (1993). What do depression rating scales measure? The British Journal of Psychiatry, 163, 293–298.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spielberger, C. D., & Sydeman, S. (1994). State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory. In M. E. Maruish (Ed.), The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcomes. Hillsdale: Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spielberger, C. D., Gorsuch, R. L., & Lushene, R. E. (1970). STAI: Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spielberger, C. D., Vagg, P. R., Barker, L. R., Donham, G. W., & Westberry, L. G. (1980). Factor structure of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. In I. G. Sarason & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Stress and anxiety (Vol. 7, pp. 95–109). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spielberger, C. D., Gorsuch, R. L., Lushene, R. E., Vagg, P. R., & Jacobs, G. A. (1983). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory STAI (Form Y). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suzuki, T., Tsukamoto, K., & Abe, K. (2000). Characteristics factor structures of the Japanese version of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory: coexistence of positive–negative and state-trait factor structures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 74(3), 447–458. doi:10.1207/S15327752JPA7403_8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vagg, P. R., Spielberger, C. D., & O’Hearn, T. P., Jr. (1980). Is the state-trait anxiety inventory multidimensional? Personality and Individual Differences, 1, 207–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vautier, S. (2004). A longitudinal SEM approach to STAI data:two comprehensive multitrait-multistate models. Journal of Personality Assessment, 83(2), 167–179. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa8302_11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vautier, S., & Pohl, S. (2009). Do balanced scales assess bipolar constructs? The case of the STAI scales. Psychological Assessment, 21(2), 187–193.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vautier, S., Raufaste, E., & Cariou, M. (2003). Dimensionality of the revised Life Orientation Test and the status of filler items. International Journal of Psychology, 38, 390–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vautier, S., Callahan, S., Moncany, D., & Sztulman, H. (2004). A bi-stable view of single constructs measured using balanced questionnaires: application to trait anxiety. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 11, 261–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vigneau, F., & Cormier, S. (2008). The factor structure of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory: an alternative view. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90(3), 280–285. doi:10.1080/00223890701885027.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, A. (2009). Metacognitive therapy for anxiety and depression. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Michela Balsamo elaborated the research hypotheses. Michela Balsamo, Roberta Romanelli, Leonardo Carlucci and Gabriele Ciccarese performed data analyses. Marco Innamorati and Aristide Saggino contributed in the planning of the design of the study as well in the interpretation of the results. All authors contributed and approved the final version of the manuscript. The authors thank Maria Rita Sergi and Antonella Macchia for their contribution to data collection.

Conflict of Interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michela Balsamo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Balsamo, M., Romanelli, R., Innamorati, M. et al. The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory: Shadows and Lights on its Construct Validity. J Psychopathol Behav Assess 35, 475–486 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-013-9354-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-013-9354-5

Keywords

Navigation