Advertisement

Cognitive Therapy and Research

, Volume 37, Issue 3, pp 421–433 | Cite as

Tolerance of Negative Affective States (TNAS): Development and Evaluation of a Novel Construct and Measure

  • Amit Bernstein
  • Hadas Brantz
Original Article

Abstract

The purpose of the present research was to develop and evaluate a novel conceptual model and measure of Tolerance of Negative Affective States (TNAS). Exploratory factor and parallel analyses and subsequent confirmatory factor analyses supported a hierarchical multi-dimensional model of TNAS. We observed one higher-order factor, labeled Tolerance of Negative Emotions, and six lower-order factors, including, FI Tolerance of Fear-Distress, FII Tolerance of Sadness-Depression, FIII Tolerance of Anger, FIV Tolerance of Disgust, FV Tolerance of Anxious-Apprehension, and FVI Tolerance of Negative Social Emotions. A series of tests documented that TNASS sub-scale scores demonstrate internal consistency as well as convergent and discriminant validity. We discuss the findings with respect to understanding the nature of the emergent TNAS construct and its measurement.

Keywords

Distress tolerance Assessment 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Dr. Bernstein recognizes the funding support from the Israeli Council for Higher Education Yigal Alon Fellowship, the European Union FP-7 Marie Curie Fellowship International Reintegration Grant, the Israel Science Foundation, the National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical LRP, Psychology Beyond Borders Mission Award, the University of Haifa Research Authority, and the Rothschild-Caesarea Foundation’s Returning Scientists Project at the University of Haifa.

References

  1. American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text rev.). Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  2. Barlow, D. H. (2002). Anxiety and its disorders (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  3. Barlow, D. H., Allen, L. B., & Choate, M. L. (2004). Toward a unified treatment for emotional disorders. Behavior Therapy, 35, 205–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588.
  5. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.Google Scholar
  6. Bernstein, A., Trafton, J., Ilgen, M., & Zvolensky, M. J. (2008). An evaluation of the role of smoking context on a biobehavioral index of distress tolerance. Addictive Behaviors, 33, 1409–1415.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernstein, A., Zvolensky, M. J., Vujanovic, A. A., & Moos, R. (2009). Anxiety sensitivity, distress tolerance, and discomfort intolerance: A hierarchical model of affect sensitivity and Tolerance. Behavior Therapy, 40, 291–301.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bernstein, A., Marshall-Berenz, E. C., & Zvolensky, M. J. (2011a). Multi-method evaluation of distress tolerance measures and construct(s): Concurrent relations to mood and anxiety psychopathology and quality of life. Journal of Experimental Psychopathology, 2(3), 386–399.Google Scholar
  9. Bernstein, A., Vujanovic, A. A., Leyro, T., & Zvolensky, M. J. (2011b). Distress tolerance: Research synthesis and future directions. In M. J. Zvolensky, A. Bernstein, & A. A. Vujanovic (Eds.), Distress tolerance. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. Oxford, UK: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  11. Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1, 185–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological wellbeing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 822–848. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Byrne, B. M. (2009). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  15. Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ekman, P. (1999). Basic emotions. In T. Dalgleish & M. Power (Eds.), Handbook of cognition and emotion. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  17. Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4, 272–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Geisinger, K. F. (1994). Cross-cultural normative assessment: Translation and adaptation issues influencing the normative interpretation of assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 6, 304–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gorsuch, R. (1983). Factor Analysis. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  20. Gratz, K. L., & Roemer, L. (2004). Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation and dysregulation: Development, factor structure, and initial validation of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 26, 41–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K., & Wilson, K. G. (1999). Acceptance and commitment therapy: An experiential approach to behavior change. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  22. Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K., Wilson, K. G., Bissett, R. T., Pistorello, J., & Toarmino, D. (2004). Measuring experiential avoidance: A preliminary test of a working model. Psychological Record, 54, 553–578.Google Scholar
  23. Haynes, S. N., Richard, D. C. S., & Kubany, E. S. (1995). Content validity in psychological assessment: A functional approach to concepts and methods. Psychological Assessment, 7, 238–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hayton, J. C., Allen, D. G., & Scarpello, V. (2004). Factor retention decisions in exploratory factor analysis: A tutorial on parallel analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 7, 191–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modeling: guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6, 53–60.Google Scholar
  26. Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179–185.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural Equation Modeling. Concepts, Issues, and Applications (pp. 76–99). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  28. 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), 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
  29. Izard, C. E. (1977). Human emotions. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  30. Izard. C. E., Dougherty. F. E., Bloxom. B. M. L., and Kotsch, W. E. (1974). The Differential Emotions Scale: A method of measuring the subjective experience of discrete emotions. Unpublished manuscript. Vanderbilt University. Nashville. TN.Google Scholar
  31. Jaccard, J., & Wan, C. K. (1996). LISREL approaches to interaction effects in multiple regression. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  32. James, L. R., Mulaik, S. A., & Brett, J. M. (1982). Causal analysis: Assumptions, models, and data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  33. Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Keltner, D. (1995). The signs of appeasement: Evidence for the distinct displays of embarrassment, amusement and shame. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 441–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Larsen, R. J., & Fredrickson, B. L. (1999). Measurement issues in emotion research. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 40–60). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  36. Leyro, T. M., Zvolensky, M. J., & Bernstein, A. (2010). Distress tolerance and psychopathological symptoms and disorders: A review of the empirical literature among adults. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 576–600.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Linehan, M. M. (1993). Cognitive-behavioral treatment of borderline personality disorder. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  38. MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4, 84–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Marlatt, G. A., & Gordon, J. R. (1985). Relapse prevention: Maintenance strategies in addictive behavior change. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  40. Matthews, G., Deary, I. J., & Whiteman, M. C. (2003). Personality traits (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McHugh, R. K., Daughters, S. B., Lejuez, C. W., Murray, H. W., Hearon, B. A., Gorka, S. M., and Otto, M. W. (2011). Shared variance among self-report and behavioral measures of distress intolerance. Journal of Cognitive Therapy and Research, 35(3), 266–275. doi: 10.1007/s10608-010-9295-1.Google Scholar
  42. McIntosh, C. N. (2007). Rethinking fit assessment in structural equation modelling: A commentary and elaboration on barrett (2007). Personality and Individual Differences, 42(5), 859–867.Google Scholar
  43. Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. O’Connor, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer’s MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computer, 32, 396–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Olatunji, B. O., & Wolitzky-Taylor, K. B. (2009). Anxiety sensitivity and the anxiety disorders: A meta-analytic review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 974–999.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Orsillo, S. M., & Roemer, L. (2005). Acceptance and mindfulness-based approaches to anxiety: Conceptualization and treatment. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Russell, J. A. (1994). Is there universal recognition of emotion from facial expression? Psychological Bulletin, 115, 102–141.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling, Second edition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  49. Simons, J., & Gaher, R. (2005). The Distress Tolerance Scale: Development and validation of a self report measure. Motivation and Emotion, 29, 83–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tangney, J. P., Miller, R. S., Flicker, L., & Barlow, D. H. (1996). Are shame, guilt, and embarrassment distinct emotions? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1256–1269.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Hambleton, R. K. (1996). Translating tests: Some practical guidelines. European Psychologist, 1, 89–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wagner, H. L. (2000). The accessibility of the term “contempt” and the meaning of the unilateral lip curl. Cognition and Emotion, 14, 689–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of the brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zvolensky, M. J., Arrindell, W. A., Taylor, S., Bouvard, M., Cox, B. J., & Stewart, S. H. (2003). Anxiety sensitivity in six countries. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41, 841–859.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Zvolensky, M. J., Vujanovic, A. A., Bernstein, A., & Leyro, T. (2010). Distress tolerance: Theory, measurement, and relations to psychopathologyy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19, 406–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zvolensky, M. J., Bernstein, A., & Vujanovic, A. A. (Eds.). (2011a). Distress tolerance. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  57. Zvolensky, M. J., Leyro, T., Bernstein, A., & Vujanovic, A. A. (2011b). Distress tolerance: Historical perspectives, theory, and measurement. In M. J. Zvolensky, A. Bernstein, & A. A. Vujanovic (Eds.), Distress tolerance. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of HaifaHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations