Journal of Happiness Studies

, Volume 17, Issue 5, pp 2097–2117 | Cite as

The Structure of Adolescent Affective Well-Being: The Case of the PANAS Among Serbian Adolescents

  • Veljko JovanovićEmail author
  • Vesna Gavrilov-Jerković
Research Paper


The structure of affective well-being and the relationship between positive affect (PA) and negative affect (NA) have rarely been examined among adolescents. The aim of the present research was to investigate the question of bipolarity versus independence of PA and NA as measured by the PANAS across three studies in adolescent samples. The results of Study 1 (N = 1038) showed that a two-factor structure of the PANAS, with correlated PA and NA and allowed correlated errors between similarly worded items provided the best fit to data. Study 2 included three independent samples (total N = 1071), and showed that PA and NA differed in terms of their relationship to various well-being indicators. Study 3 (N = 482) tested the predictive validity of PA and NA in a 5 month follow-up design, and showed that both PA and NA had independent predictive benefits for depression, risky behaviors and life satisfaction, and that PA had no unique role in the prediction of stress and anxiety, while NA had no unique role in the prediction of academic achievement. The results of the present research provided strong support for the relative independence of PA and NA as measured by the PANAS among adolescents.


Positive affect Negative affect Structure PANAS Well-being 



This work was supported by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Serbia (Grant No. 179006).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

There is no conflict of interest in this paper.


  1. Alarcon, G. M., Bowling, N. A., & Khazon, S. (2013). Great expectations: A meta-analytic examination of optimism and hope. Personality and Individual Differences, 54, 821–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arnett, J. J. (1999). Adolescent storm and stress, reconsidered. American Psychologist, 54, 317–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arthaud-Day, M. L., Rode, J. C., Mooney, C. H., & Near, J. P. (2005). The subjective well-being construct: A test of its convergent, discriminant, and factorial validity. Social Indicators Research, 74, 445–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Asarnow, J. R., Jaycox, L. H., Duan, N., LaBorde, A. P., Rea, M. M., Tang, L., & Wells, K. B. (2005). Depression and role impairment among adolescents in primary care clinics. Journal of Adolescent Health, 37, 477–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Auerbach, R. P., & Gardiner, C. K. (2012). Moving beyond the trait conceptualization of self-esteem: The prospective effect of impulsiveness, coping, and risky behavior engagement. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 50, 596–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barrett, P. (2007). Structural equation modeling: Adjudging model fit. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 815–824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ben-Zur, H. (2003). Happy adolescents: The link between subjective well-being, internal resources, parental factors. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 32, 67–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bradburn, N. M. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  9. Burns, R. A., & Anstey, K. J. (2010). The Connor–Davidson resilience scale (CD-RISC): Testing the invariance of a uni-dimensional resilience measure that is independent of positive and negative affect. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 527–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Burns, R. A., Anstey, K. J., & Windsor, T. D. (2011). Subjective well-being mediates the effects of resilience and mastery on depression and anxiety in a large community sample of young and middle-aged adults. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 45, 240–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Campbell-Sills, L., & Stein, M. B. (2007). Psychometric analysis and refinement of the Connor–Davidson resilience scale (CD-RISC): Validation of a 10-item measure of resilience. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 20, 1019–1028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Caprara, G. V., Steca, P., Gerbino, M., Paciello, M., & Vecchio, G. (2006). Looking for adolescents’ well-being: self-efficacy beliefs as determinants of positive thinking and happiness. Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale, 15, 30–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carroll, J. M., Yik, M. S. M., Russell, J. A., & Feldman Barrett, L. (1999). On the psychometric principles of affect. Review of General Psychology, 3, 14–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1991). Tripartite model of anxiety and depression: Psychometric evidence and taxonomic implications. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100, 316–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Connor, K. M., & Davidson, J. R. T. (2003). Development of a new resilience scale: The Connor–Davidson resilience scale (CD-RISC). Depression and Anxiety, 18, 76–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cooper, M. L., Agocha, V. B., & Sheldon, M. S. (2000). A motivational perspective on risky behaviors: The role of personality and affect regulatory processes. Journal of Personality, 68, 1059–1088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Coyle, L. D., & Vera, E. M. (2013). Uncontrollable stress, coping, and subjective well-being in urban adolescents. Journal of Youth Studies, 16(3), 391–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Crawford, J. R., & Henry, J. D. (2004). The positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS): Construct validity, measurement properties and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 43, 245–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Diener, E. (1999). Introduction to the special section on the structure of emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 803–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Diener, E., Inglehart, R., & Tay, L. (2013). Theory and validity of life satisfaction scales. Social Indicators Research, 112, 497–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Diener, E., Scollon, C. N., & Lucas, R. E. (2004). The evolving concept of subjective well-being: The multifaceted nature of happiness. Advances in Cell Aging and Gerontology, 15, 187–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. E. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D.-W., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2010). New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicators Research, 97, 143–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Feldman Barrett, L., & Russell, J. A. (1998). Independence and bipolarity in the structure of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 967–984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Feldman Barrett, L., & Russell, J. A. (1999). The structure of current affect: Controversies and emerging consensus. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8, 10–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56, 218–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fredrickson, B. L., & Joiner, T. (2002). Positive emotions trigger upward spirals toward emotional well-being. Psychological Science, 13, 172–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Galinha, I., & Pais-Ribeiro, J. L. (2011). Cognitive, affective and contextual predictors of subjective wellbeing. International Journal of Wellbeing, 2(1), 34–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Garcia, D., & Moradi, S. (2013). The affective temperaments and well-being: Swedish and Iranian adolescents’ life satisfaction and psychological well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14, 689–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gaudreau, P., Sanchez, X., & Blondin, J.-P. (2006). Positive and negative affective states in a performance-related setting: Testing the factorial structure of the PANAS across two samples of French-Canadian participants. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 22, 240–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gavrilov-Jerković, V., Jovanović, V., Žuljević, D., & Brdarić, D. (2014). When less is more: A short version of the personal optimism scale and the self-efficacy optimism scale. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15, 455–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Green, D. P., Goldman, S. L., & Salovey, P. (1993). Measurement error masks bipolarity in affect ratings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 1029–1041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gruenewald, T. L., Mroczek, D. K., Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. H. (2008). Diverse pathways to positive and negative affect in adulthood and later life: An integrative approach using recursive partitioning. Developmental Psychology, 44, 330–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hanson, T. L., Austin, G., & Lee-Bayha, J. (2004). Ensuring that no child is left behind: How are student health risks and resilience related to the academic progress of schools. San Francisco: WestEd.Google Scholar
  36. Henry, J. D., & Crawford, J. R. (2005). The short-form version of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21): Construct validity and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44, 227–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hoerger, M. (2013). ZH: An updated version of Steiger’s Z and web-based calculator for testing the statistical significance of the difference between dependent correlations. Retrieved from
  38. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Huppert, F. A. (2009). Psychological well-being: Evidence regarding its causes and consequences. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 1, 137–164.Google Scholar
  40. Jacques, H. A. K., & Mash, E. J. (2004). A test of the tripartite model of anxiety and depression in elementary and high school boys and girls. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 13–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jovanović, V., & Gavrilov-Jerković, V. (2013). Dimensionality and validity of the Serbian version of the life orientation test-revised. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14(3), 771–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Jovanović, V., & Gavrilov-Jerković, V. (2014). The good, the bad (and the ugly): The role of curiosity in subjective well-being and risky behaviors among adolescents. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 55(1), 38–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Jovanović, V., Gavrilov-Jerković, V., Žuljević, D., & Brdarić, D. (2014). Psihometrijska evaluacija Skale depresivnosti, anksioznosti i stresa–21 (DASS–21) na uzorku studenata u Srbiji [Psychometric evaluation of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales–21 (DASS–21) in a Serbian student sample]. Psihologija, 47, 93–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kuppens, P., Realo, A., & Diener, E. (2008). The role of positive and negative emotions in life satisfaction judgment across nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 66–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Larsen, J. T., McGraw, A. P., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2001). Can people feel happy and sad at the same time? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 684–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lawton, M. P., Kleban, M. H., & Dean, J. (1993). Affect and age: Cross-sectional comparisons of structure and prevalence. Psychology and Aging, 8, 165–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lonigan, C. J., Hooe, E. S., David, C. F., & Kistner, J. A. (1999). Positive and negative affectivity in children: Confirmatory factor analysis of a two-factor model and its relation to symptoms of anxiety and depression. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 374–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lovibond, S. H., & Lovibond, P. F. (1995). Manual for the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (2nd ed.). Sydney: Psychology Foundation.Google Scholar
  49. Luszczynska, A., Gutiérrez-Doña, B., & Schwarzer, R. (2005). General self-efficacy in various domains of human functioning: Evidence from five countries. International Journal of Psychology, 40, 80–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131, 803–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Marsh, H. W., & Grayson, D. (1995). Latent variable models of multitrait-multimethod data. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concept, issues, and applications (pp. 177–198). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  52. Maul, A. (2013). Method effect and the meaning of measurement. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Mehrabian, A. (1997). Comparison of the PAD and PANAS as models for describing emotions and for differentiating anxiety from depression. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 19, 331–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Melvin, G. A., & Molloy, G. N. (2000). Some psychometric properties of the Positive and Negative Affect schedule among Australian youth. Psychological Reports, 86, 1209–1212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mihić, Lj, Novović, Z., Čolović, P., & Smederevac, S. (2014). Serbian adaptation of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS): Its facets and second-order structure. Psihologija, 47, 393–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Molloy, G. N., Pallant, J. F., & Kantas, A. (2001). A psychometric comparison of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule across age and sex. Psychological Reports, 88, 861–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Nathans, L. L., Oswald, F. L., & Nimon, K. (2012). Interpreting multiple regression: A guidebook of variable importance. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 9, 1–19.Google Scholar
  58. Ong, A. D., Bergeman, C. S., Bisconti, T. L., & Wallace, K. A. (2006). Psychological resilience, positive emotions, and successful adaptation to stress in later life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 730–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pilcher, J. J. (1998). Affective and daily event predictors of life satisfaction in college students. Social Indicators Research, 43, 291–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Rush, J., & Hofer, S. M. (2014). Differences in within- and between-person factor structure of positive and negative affect: Analysis of two intensive measurement studies using multilevel structural equation modeling. Psychological Assessment, 26, 462–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Russell, J. A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 1161–1178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Russell, J. A., & Carroll, J. M. (1999). On the bipolarity of positive and negative affect. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Scheier, M. F., Carver, C. S., & Bridges, M. W. (1994). Distinguishing optimism from neuroticism (and trait anxiety, self-mastery, and self-esteem): A reevaluation of the Life Orientation Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1063–1078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Schimmack, U. (2007). Methodological issues in the assessment of the affective component of subjective well-being. In A. D. Ong & M. H. M. Van Dulmen (Eds.), Oxford handbook of methods in positive psychology (pp. 96–110). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Schimmack, U. (2008). The structure of subjective well-being. In M. L. Eid & R. J. Larsen (Eds.), The science of subjective well-being (pp. 97–123). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  66. Schimmack, U. (2009). Culture, gender, and the bipolarity of momentary affect: A critical re-examination. Cognition and Emotion, 23, 599–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Schimmack, U., Bockenholt, U., & Reisenzein, R. (2002). Response styles in affect ratings: Making a mountain out of a molehill. Journal of Personality Assessment, 78, 461–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized self-efficacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston (Eds.), Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp. 35–37). Windsor: NFER-NELSON.Google Scholar
  69. Terracciano, A., McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T, Jr. (2003). Factorial and construct validity of the Italian Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 19, 131–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Thompson, E. R. (2007). Development and validation of an internationally reliable short-form of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38, 227–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Tuccitto, D. E., Giacobbi, P. R, Jr, & Leite, W. L. (2010). The internal structure of positive and negative affect: A confirmatory factor analysis of the PANAS. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70, 125–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Valiente, C., Swanson, J., & Eisenberg, N. (2012). Linking students’ emotions and achievement: When and why emotions matter. Child Development Perspectives, 6, 129–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Vansteelandt, K., Van Mechelen, I., & Nezlek, J. B. (2005). The co-occurrence of emotions in daily life: A multilevel approach. Journal of Research in Personality, 39, 325–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Vasić, A., Šarčević, D., & Trogrlić, A. (2011). Zadovoljstvo životom u Srbiji [Life satisfaction in Serbia]. Primenjena psihologija, 2, 151–177.Google Scholar
  75. Vera, E., Thakral, C., Gonzales, R., Morgan, M., Conner, W., Caskey, E., & Dick, L. (2008). Subjective well-being in urban adolescents of color. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 14, 224–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Villodas, F., Villodas, M. T., & Roesch, S. C. (2011). Examining the factor structure of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) in a multiethnic sample of adolescents. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 44(4), 193–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1997). The measurement and mismeasurement of mood: Recurrent and emergent issues. Journal of Personality Assessment, 86, 267–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS Scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1063–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Watson, D., & Tellegen, A. (1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 219–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Watson, D., Wiese, D., Vaidya, J., & Tellegen, A. (1999). The two general activation systems of affect: Structural findings, evolutionary considerations, and psychobiological evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 820–838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Yik, M. (2007). Culture, gender, and the bipolarity of momentary affect. Cognition and Emotion, 21, 664–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Yik, M. S. M., Russell, J. A., & Feldman Barrett, L. (1999). Structure of self-reported current affect: Integration and beyond. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 600–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Zautra, A. J., Affleck, G. G., Tennen, H., Reich, J., & Davis, M. C. (2005). Dynamic approaches to emotions and stress in everyday life: Bolger and Zuckerman reloaded with positive as well as negative affects. Journal of Personality, 73, 1511–1538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Zautra, A. J., Berkhof, J., & Nicolson, N. A. (2002). Changes in affect interrelations as a function of stressful events. Cognition and Emotion, 16, 309–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Zimmermann, P., & Iwanski, A. (2014). Emotion regulation from early adolescence to emerging adulthood and middle adulthood: Age differences, gender differences, and emotion-specific developmental variations. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 38, 182–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Novi SadNovi SadSerbia

Personalised recommendations