Toward a measurement model of the affect intensity measure: A three-factor structure
Toward a measurement model of the affect intensity measure: A three-factor structure
复制标题
DOI：
10.1006/jrpe.1996.0015
复制
发表时间：
1996-06-01
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Grimm, LG
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bryant, FB;Yarnold, PR;Grimm, LG
Larsen (1984) 开发了情感强度测量 (AIM)，作为一种理论单维结构的测量，称为情感强度，或人们体验情绪的特征强度。研究 1 使用两个独立的本科生样本（Ns = 673 和 631）调查了 AIM 的五种不同测量模型的拟合优度。对于这两个样本，最佳拟合模型由三个因素（积极情感、消极强度、消极反应性）组成，这三个因素解释了对 27 个 AIM 项目子集的响应中大约 80% 的常见方差。其他分析显示，女性在消极反应方面的得分高于男性，并且对消极刺激的情绪反应比对积极刺激的反应更大，而男性对积极刺激的反应比对消极刺激的反应更大。这些性别差异可以用差异社会化来解释，这使得女性相对于男性更愿意或能够表达负面情绪。研究 2 评估了三因素模型相对于一维 AIM 总分的判别有效性，用于预测通过人际反应指数衡量的性格共情维度（IRI；Davis，1983）。三个 AIM 因素共同解释了比 AIM 总分更多的性格共情差异，R(2) 的增加范围从低 8%（对于幻想）到高 125%（对于观点采择）。每个 AIM 因素都显示出区分效度，与 IRI 子量表呈现出不同的关系模式，并且与其他两个 AIM 因素相比，消极反应性对倾向性同理心的预测能力更强。这些结果证实了情感强度的多维性，并强调了区分经历负面情绪时的特征强度（即性格强度）和响应厌恶刺激时表达的情绪特征强度（即性格反应性）的重要性。 (C) 1996 年流行病出版社。公司
Larsen (1984) developed the Affect Intensity Measure (AIM) as a measure of a theoretical unidimensional construct referred to as affect intensity, or the characteristic strength with which people experience emotions. Study 1 investigated the goodness-of-fit of five different measurement models of the AIM, using two independent samples of undergraduates (Ns = 673 and 631). For both samples, the best-fitting model consisted of three factors (Positive Affectivity, Negative Intensity, Negative Reactivity) that explained roughly 80% of the common variance in responses to a subset of 27 AIM items. Additional analyses revealed that women scored higher on Negative Reactivity than did men and were more emotionally reactive to negative stimuli than to positive, whereas men were more reactive to positive stimuli than to negative. These gender differences are explained in terms of differential socialization, which makes females more willing or able to express negative emotions relative to males. Study 2 assessed the discriminant validity of the three-factor model, relative to unidimensional AIM total score, in predicting dimensions of dispositional empathy as measured by the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI; Davis, 1983). The three AIM factors together explained more variance in dispositional empathy than did AIM total score, with the increase in R(2) ranging from a low of 8% (for Fantasy) to a high of 125% (for Perspective Taking). Demonstrating discriminant validity, each AIM factor showed a different pattern of relations with the IRI subscales, and Negative Reactivity was more strongly predictive of dispositional empathy than were the other two AIM factors. These results corroborate the multidimensionality of affect intensity and highlight the importance of distinguishing between the characteristic strength of negative emotions when they are experienced (i.e., dispositional intensity) and the characteristic strength of emotions expressed in response to aversive stimuli (i.e., dispositional reactivity). (C) 1996 Acndemic Press. Inc.