Positive and Negative Affect Scale PANAS

1. Abstract

The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) and its extended counterpart, the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule—Expanded Form (PANAS-X), developed by David Watson, Lee Anna Clark, and Auke Tellegen, represent foundational psychometric instruments designed to evaluate the valence and activation dimensions of human emotional experience. Grounded in a robust two-factor structure of mood, the scale operationalizes affective state and trait dispositions across two primary orthogonal dimensions: Positive Affect (PA), reflecting the extent to which an individual feels enthusiastic, active, energetic, and alert; and Negative Affect (NA), representing a general dimension of subjective distress and unpleasurable engagement that subsumes a variety of aversive emotional states, including anger, contempt, disgust, guilt, fear, and nervousness.

The standard PANAS comprises 20 mood descriptors (10 for PA and 10 for NA), whereas the PANAS-X expands this framework to a comprehensive 60-item inventory. This expanded form retains the 20-item general dimensions while systematically assessing 11 specific lower-order affective states organized hierarchically: basic negative emotions (Fear, Hostility, Guilt, Sadness), basic positive emotions (Joviality, Self-Assurance, Attentiveness), and other affective states (Shyness, Fatigue, Serenity, Surprise). Both instruments utilize an authentic 5-point Likert-type response format ranging from 1 (very slightly or not at all) to 5 (extremely). Across diverse clinical, non-clinical, occupational, and experimental populations, the scale demonstrates exceptional psychometric properties. Internal consistency coefficients (Cronbach’s alpha) typically range from .86 to .90 for Positive Affect and from .84 to .87 for Negative Affect in the standard form, while the specific subscales of the PANAS-X demonstrate alphas consistently spanning .70 to .94. Demonstrating rigorous structural, convergent, discriminant, and criterion-related validity, the PANAS instruments remain benchmark measures in personality psychology, affective neuroscience, psychopathology, and clinical trial monitoring.

2. Keywords

Positive Affect, Negative Affect, PANAS, PANAS-X, Watson and Clark, Emotional Structure, Psychometrics, State-Trait Affect, Factor Analysis, Mood Assessment, Psychological Well-Being

3. Authors

The development, structural validation, and expansion of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule are attributed to leading researchers in personality assessment, affective science, and clinical psychology:

• David Watson, Ph.D. — Andrew J. McKenna Family Professor of Psychology at the University of Notre Dame; formerly Professor of Psychology at the University of Iowa. Dr. Watson is an internationally renowned psychometrician and affective scientist whose foundational research on the structure of personality and emotion established the two-factor model of mood and the tripartite model of anxiety and depression.
• Lee Anna Clark, Ph.D. — William J. and Dorothy K. O’Neill Professor of Psychology at the University of Notre Dame; formerly at the University of Iowa. Dr. Clark is an authority on personality pathology, psychiatric classification, and the hierarchical organization of emotional and personality traits, playing a central role in the development of both the PANAS-X and the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP).
• Auke Tellegen, Ph.D. (Co-developer of the original 20-item PANAS) — Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of Minnesota. A pioneer in personality theory, multidimensional scaling of affect, and quantitative psychology, Tellegen co-authored the seminal 1988 validation study establishing the orthogonal structure of Positive and Negative Affect.

4. Purpose

The core objective of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) and its expanded form (PANAS-X) is to provide psychometrically pure, brief, and highly reliable self-report indices of the two dominant dimensions of affective experience, as well as specific differentiated affective states. Prior to the development of the PANAS, the measurement of mood was plagued by instruments exhibiting poor discriminant validity, excessive item overlap between affective valence dimensions, and significant confounding with somatic complaints, cognitive symptoms, and vegetative indicators. Watson, Clark, and Tellegen sought to create an instrument that isolated pure emotional content, disentangling affective activation from physical distress and somatic conditions.

In clinical settings, the PANAS serves as a pivotal diagnostic and monitoring instrument. Watson and Clark’s tripartite model of anxiety and depression relies heavily on the PANAS framework: depressive disorders are uniquely characterized by low Positive Affect (anhedonia) accompanied by elevated Negative Affect, whereas generalized anxiety and panic states are marked by high Negative Affect (general distress, autonomic arousal) with relatively preserved Positive Affect. By administering the PANAS, clinicians can objectively track symptom resolution, therapeutic response, and the recovery of positive emotional vitality in cognitive-behavioral therapy, pharmacotherapy, and somatic interventions.

In research environments, the scale offers exceptional versatility due to its flexible temporal framing. Researchers can administer the PANAS with varying instructions to measure momentary affect (“indicate how you feel right now, at the present moment”), daily state affect (“how you felt today”), short-term temporal stability (“past few days” or “past week”), or enduring dispositional trait affect (“how you feel generally, that is, on average”). This temporal flexibility allows the instrument to be utilized in ecological momentary assessment (EMA), laboratory mood induction experiments, psychophysiological investigations, occupational stress research, and longitudinal epidemiological tracking of subjective well-being and health outcomes.

5. Psychological Construct

The emotional taxonomy underlying the PANAS operationalizes human affect within a multidimensional hierarchical structure. The instrument differentiates between two broad, higher-order affective dimensions and eleven discrete lower-order emotional states:

Higher-Order General Affective Dimensions

• Positive Affect (PA): Reflects the extent to which a person feels active, enthusiastic, and alert. High PA is an affective state of high energy, full concentration, and pleasurable engagement. Individuals high in PA experience zest for life, vitality, and optimism. Low PA is characterized by sadness, lethargy, sluggishness, and fatigue, reflecting an absence of energetic engagement rather than active distress.
• Negative Affect (NA): Represents a general dimension of unpleasurable engagement and subjective distress that encompasses a wide variety of aversive emotional states. High NA is marked by subjective distress, nervous tension, anxiety, disgust, guilt, anger, and fear. Conversely, low NA is a state of calmness, equanimity, and serenity. Crucially, in this orthogonal framework, low Negative Affect does not imply high Positive Affect, but rather tranquility and the absence of distress.

Hierarchical Lower-Order Subscales (PANAS-X)

The PANAS-X builds upon this general structure by incorporating 11 mutually distinct lower-order emotional scales, capturing discrete experiential states that share common higher-order variance:

• Basic Negative Emotion Scales:
  • Fear: Measured by descriptors such as afraid, scared, frightened, nervous, jittery, shaky. Captures threat anticipation, acute apprehension, and autonomic hyperarousal.
  • Sadness: Captured by sad, blue, downhearted, alone, lonely. Measures feelings of loss, dejection, despondency, and perceived social isolation.
  • Guilt: Measured by guilty, ashamed, blameworthy, angry at self, disgusted with self, dissatisfied with self. Reflects internal self-reproach, moral failure, and dysphoric self-evaluation.
  • Hostility: Comprising angry, hostile, irritable, scornful, disgusted, loathing. Encompasses externally directed aggression, resentment, irritability, and interpersonal antagonism.
• Basic Positive Emotion Scales:
  • Joviality: Measured by happy, joyful, delighted, cheerful, excited, enthusiastic, lively, energetic. Captures exuberant, outward expressions of happiness, playfulness, and high-energy joy.
  • Self-Assurance: Evaluated via proud, strong, confident, bold, daring, fearless. Reflects competence, agency, social boldness, and self-efficacy.
  • Attentiveness: Measured by alert, attentive, concentrating, determined. Characterizes task-oriented focus, cognitive clarity, vigilance, and goal-directed persistence.
• Other Affective States:
  • Shyness: Indicated by shy, bashful, timid, sheepish. Captures social inhibition, awkwardness, and self-conscious wariness.
  • Fatigue: Indicated by sleepy, tired, sluggish, drowsy. Measures physical weariness, depleted physiological reserves, and low behavioral activation.
  • Serenity: Evaluated by calm, relaxed, at ease. Reflects low-arousal positive valence, quiescence, and peaceful emotional stability.
  • Surprise: Comprising amazed, surprised, astonished. Reflects orienting responses to unexpected environmental stimuli, an ambiguous state that can assume positive or negative valence depending on contextual framing.

6. Theoretical Framework

The theoretical bedrock of the PANAS rests on extensive structural analyses of human affect conducted by David Watson and Auke Tellegen (1985). Examining dozens of self-report mood inventories through exploratory factor analysis and multidimensional scaling, Watson and Tellegen discovered that emotional space is universally structured around a two-factor circular model, often termed the Consensual Structure of Mood.

In this circumplex-derived formulation, two primary rotational orientations emerge: one defined by pure Hedonic Tone (Pleasantness vs. Unpleasantness) and Arousal (High Activation vs. Low Activation), as advocated in James Russell’s circumplex model; and an alternative 45-degree rotation comprising Positive Affect and Negative Affect. Watson and Tellegen argued that the 45-degree rotation yields distinct, functionally significant psychobiological dimensions. Specifically, high PA reflects activation in the behavioral facilitation/approach system (BAS), driving exploratory behavior, reward-seeking, and social engagement, whereas high NA corresponds to activation of the behavioral inhibition system (BIS), facilitating threat detection, avoidance, and survival responses under stress.

A central axiom of this framework is the orthogonality of Positive and Negative Affect. Rather than representing opposite ends of a single continuum, PA and NA function as distinct psychobiological dimensions. An individual can simultaneously experience high PA and high NA (e.g., during intense challenge or crisis), low PA and low NA (e.g., a state of apathy or emotional flatlining), or any other combination. The PANAS descriptors were chosen specifically because they maximize loading on their target higher-order factor while maintaining near-zero cross-loadings on the opposing dimension, thereby ensuring absolute mathematical and conceptual independence.

7. Validity

The structural, convergent, discriminant, and criterion-related validity of the PANAS has been empirically confirmed across hundreds of psychometric investigations spanning multiple decades:

• Construct and Factorial Validity: Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) consistently support the two-factor orthogonal model for the 20 general items across varying time frames. The intercorrelation between the PA and NA general scales is consistently minimal, ranging from r = -.12 to -.23, confirming substantial empirical independence. In the 60-item PANAS-X, second-order hierarchical CFAs reveal that the discrete subscales load cleanly onto their respective higher-order factors (e.g., Joviality, Self-Assurance, and Attentiveness loading strongly onto PA; Fear, Sadness, Guilt, and Hostility loading onto NA).
• Convergent Validity: General Positive Affect correlates strongly with measures of extraversion, social interaction frequency, positive appraisal, and life satisfaction (correlations ranging from .50 to .75). Conversely, general Negative Affect correlates robustly with neuroticism (r = .55 to .70), perceived stress, somatic symptom reporting, catastrophizing, and standardized inventories of anxiety and depression (e.g., Beck Depression Inventory, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory). Peer-to-self ratings (Watson & Clark, 1991) further demonstrate cross-informant convergence ranging from .40 to .60 for both dimensions.
• Discriminant Validity: Discriminant validity is evidenced by the distinct external correlates of PA and NA. As documented by Watson, Clark, and Carey (1988), clinical depression is differentiated by a marked deficit in PA alongside elevated NA, whereas generalized anxiety features elevated NA with normal or fluctuating PA. Furthermore, PA exhibits strong correlations with daytime social activity and exercise, whereas NA correlates specifically with sleep disturbances, health complaints, and daily stressors.
• Criterion and Predictive Validity: Longitudinal tracking (Watson & Walker, 1996) demonstrates that trait PA and NA scores reliably predict long-term subjective well-being, physical morbidity, academic achievement, and burnout indices over intervals exceeding seven years.

8. Reliability

The internal consistency and temporal stability of the PANAS and PANAS-X are well documented:

• Internal Consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha):
  • General Dimensions: In the original validation studies (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988), Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for Positive Affect ranged from .86 to .90 across all temporal instructions (moment, today, past few days, past week, past few weeks, year, general). For Negative Affect, alpha coefficients ranged from .84 to .87.
  • PANAS-X Subscales: As reported in the PANAS-X manual (Watson & Clark, 1994, 1999), the internal consistency estimates across various cohorts are robust:
    • Fear: α = .84 to .92
    • Sadness: α = .83 to .89
    • Guilt: α = .85 to .91
    • Hostility: α = .82 to .89
    • Shyness: α = .80 to .86
    • Fatigue: α = .84 to .89
    • Joviality: α = .88 to .94
    • Self-Assurance: α = .80 to .84
    • Attentiveness: α = .70 to .79
    • Serenity: α = .73 to .83
    • Surprise: α = .72 to .80
• Test-Retest Reliability: The temporal stability of the PANAS is directly related to the time frame specified in the instructions. When administered with dispositional/trait instructions (“in general”), the 8-week test-retest reliability is high: r = .68 to .71 for PA and r = .68 to .72 for NA. Under state instructions (“right now”), test-retest coefficients drop to .54 for PA and .45 for NA over short intervals, demonstrating high sensitivity to momentary contextual shifts while retaining underlying dispositional stability.

9. Factor Analysis

The factor structure of the PANAS was identified and cross-validated using rigorous exploratory and confirmatory analytic procedures:

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

During the initial development phases, Watson and colleagues evaluated large pools of affective adjectives drawn from Zevon and Tellegen’s checklists. Principal components and common factor analyses with Varimax and Promax rotations repeatedly isolated two robust, dominant eigenvalues accounting for the primary share of total variance. Item selection criteria mandated that descriptors possess a factor loading of ≥ .40 on the primary target dimension and a cross-loading of ≤ .25 on the non-target dimension. This eliminated blended emotional terms (e.g., “anxious” or “depressed”) that conflated sadness, fear, and low energy, leaving 10 pure markers of PA and 10 pure markers of NA.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and Model Fit

Extensive structural equation modeling across clinical, university, and community samples demonstrates that a two-factor orthogonal model provides superior fit compared to single-factor or bipolar unidimensional formulations. Fit indices consistently meet rigorous psychometric benchmarks:

• Comparative Fit Index (CFI) ≥ .92 to .96
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) ≥ .91 to .95
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) ≤ .045 to .062 (with 90% confidence intervals bounded below .070)
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) ≤ .050

In hierarchical CFA models of the 60-item PANAS-X, higher-order structures specifying two second-order factors (General PA and General NA) accounting for the covariation among the primary lower-order factors (Joviality, Fear, Sadness, etc.) yield robust goodness-of-fit parameters, confirming the validity of hierarchical affect theory.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

• Standard Designation: Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) / Positive and Negative Affect Schedule—Expanded Form (PANAS-X)
• Primary Developer Affiliation: University of Iowa & University of Minnesota (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen)
• Target Population: Adolescents (aged 12+) and adults across general, clinical, occupational, and athletic cohorts
• Administration Format: Paper-and-pencil questionnaire, computerized survey, or Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) digital prompt
• Administration Time: Approximately 3–5 minutes for the 20-item PANAS; 8–12 minutes for the 60-item PANAS-X
• Item Count: 20 items in standard PANAS; 60 items in PANAS-X
• Authentic Response Scale: 5-point Likert-type scale scored as:
  • 1 = very slightly or not at all
  • 2 = a little
  • 3 = moderately
  • 4 = quite a bit
  • 5 = extremely
• Scoring Procedures:
  • Standard General Positive Affect (10 items): Sum items interested, excited, strong, enthusiastic, proud, alert, inspired, determined, attentive, active. Possible score range: 10 to 50. Higher scores indicate greater positive engagement, energy, and alertness.
  • Standard General Negative Affect (10 items): Sum items distressed, upset, guilty, scared, hostile, irritable, ashamed, nervous, jittery, afraid. Possible score range: 10 to 50. Higher scores indicate greater general distress, emotional turmoil, and subjective suffering.
  • PANAS-X Subscale Scoring: Computed by summing the ratings of the designated adjectives for each respective lower-order dimension: Fear (6 items), Sadness (5 items), Guilt (6 items), Hostility (6 items), Shyness (4 items), Fatigue (4 items), Joviality (8 items), Self-Assurance (6 items), Attentiveness (4 items), Serenity (3 items), Surprise (3 items).

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The standard 20-item PANAS was published in 1988, and the comprehensive PANAS-X manual was released in 1994 (with expanded technical documentation published in 1999). Both instruments were developed under academic research initiatives at the University of Iowa and the University of Minnesota. Under prevailing academic fair-use guidelines, the PANAS and PANAS-X instruments are made freely accessible for non-commercial academic research, pedagogical purposes, and non-funded clinical practice. The full PANAS-X manual and scoring instructions have been made publicly available through institutional academic repositories (such as the University of Iowa Institutional Repository). Commercial applications, incorporation into proprietary digital assessment platforms, or reproduction within commercial health systems may require formal permission from the original copyright holders and academic publishers.

12. References

• Levine, R. P. (2007). Differences in perceived stress, affect, anxiety, and coping ability among college students in physical education courses (Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park).
• Watson, D. (1988). Intraindividual and interindividual analyses of Positive and Negative Affect: Their relation to health complaints, perceived stress, and daily activities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1020–1030. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1020
• Watson, D. (1988). The vicissitudes of mood measurement: Effects of varying descriptors, time frames, and response formats on measures of Positive and Negative Affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(1), 128–141. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.55.1.128
• Watson, D. (1989). Strangers’ ratings of the five robust personality factors: Evidence of a surprising convergence with self-report. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(1), 120–128. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.1.120
• Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1984). Negative affectivity: The disposition to experience aversive emotional states. Psychological Bulletin, 96(3), 465–490. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.96.3.465
• Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1989, August). General affective dimensions versus discrete emotional factors: A hierarchical model. In L. A. Clark & D. Watson (Chairs), The emotional bases of personality. Symposium presented at the 97th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans, LA.
• Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1991). Self- versus peer ratings of specific emotional traits: Evidence of convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(6), 927–940. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.6.927
• Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1992). Affects separable and inseparable: On the hierarchical arrangement of the negative affects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(3), 489–505. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.62.3.489
• Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1992). On traits and temperament: General and specific factors of emotional experience and their relation to the five-factor model. Journal of Personality, 60(2), 441–476. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00980.x
• Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1994). The PANAS-X: Manual for the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule – Expanded Form. University of Iowa, Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences. https://doi.org/10.17077/48vt-m4t2
• Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1997). Extraversion and its positive emotional core. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 767–793). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012134645-4/50030-5
• Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1999). The PANAS-X: Manual for the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule – Expanded Form. University of Iowa, Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences Publications.
• Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Carey, G. (1988). Positive and negative affectivity and their relation to anxiety and depressive disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 97(3), 346–353. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.97.3.346
• Watson, D., Clark, L. A., McIntyre, C. W., & Hamaker, S. (1992). Affect, personality, and social activity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(6), 1011–1025. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.6.1011
• Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1984). Cross-cultural convergence in the structure of mood: A Japanese replication and a comparison with U.S. findings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(1), 127–144. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.47.1.127
• 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, 54(6), 1063–1070. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063
• Watson, D., & Tellegen, A. (1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98(2), 219–235. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.219
• Watson, D., & Walker, L. M. (1996). The long-term stability and predictive validity of trait measures of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 567–577. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.567

13. Items of the Scale