sign in sign up
<<
Home , Affective neuroscience

Scientific Information System Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal

Víctor Abella, , Dionisio Manga, Carmen Bárcena, José A. Iglesias Spanish Validation of the Affective Personality Scales The Spanish Journal of , vol. 14, núm. 2, 2011, pp. 926-935, Universidad Complutense de Madrid España

Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=17220620038

The Spanish Journal of Psychology, ISSN (Printed Version): 1138-7416 [email protected] Universidad Complutense de Madrid España

How to cite Complete issue More information about this article Journal's homepage

www.redalyc.org Non-Profit Academic Project, developed under the Open Acces Initiative The Spanish Journal of Psychology Copyright 2011 by The Spanish Journal of Psychology 2011, Vol. 14, No. 2, 926-935 ISSN 1138-7416 http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/rev_SJOP.2011.v14.n2.38

Spanish Validation of the Affective Neuroscience Personality Scales

Víctor Abella 1, Jaak Panksepp 2, Dionisio Manga 3, Carmen Bárcena 3, and José A. Iglesias 3 1Universidad de Burgos (Spain) 2Washington State University (USA) 3Universidad de León (Spain)

The Affective Neuroscience Personality Scales have been designed to provide a personality assessment tool based on six distinct affective systems. The six neural systems involved were labeled , SEEK, CARE, , and . Spirituality has been integrated into the questionnaire as a seventh dimension because, in opinion of Panksepp and his colleagues is one of the most interesting human . The aim of the present paper was introduce the validation of the Spanish version of Affective Neuroscience Personality Scales and their first psychometric results in a sample of 411 college students. Participants completed the Spanish version of ANPS, just as a personality scale of five factors (NEO-FFI-R), and the Scales of Positive and Negative (PANAS). The factor structure obtained and psychometric properties of the scales indicate that the Spanish version of the scales provides an effective tool to measure the seven dimensions of personality proposal in the original questionnaire. Keywords: affective neuroscience personality, test validation, Spain .

Las Escalas de Personalidad Neuroafectivas sido diseñadas con la intención de proporcionar una herramienta de evaluación de la personalidad a partir de seis sistemas afectivos bien diferenciados. Los seis sistemas neuronales implicados se han denominado JUEGO, BÚSQUEDA, CUIDADOS, MIEDO, IRA y TRISTEZA. Espiritualidad se ha integrado en el cuestionario como una séptima dimensión debido a que según consideran Panksepp y sus colaboradores es una de las emociones humanas de mayor interés. En este trabajo se presenta la validación española de las Escalas de Personalidad Neuroafectiva y sus primeros resultados psicométricos en una muestra de 412 estudiantes universitarios. Los participantes completaron la versión española de las ANPS, así como una escala de personalidad de cinco factores (NEO-FFI-R) y las Escalas de Afecto Positivo y Negativo (PANAS). La estructura factorial obtenida y las propiedades psicométricas de las escalas indican que la versión española de las escalas se presenta como una herramienta psicométrica eficaz para evaluar las siete dimensiones de la personalidad desde un punto de vista afectivo. Palabras clave: affective neuroscience personality, validación de test, España.

We wish to thank the anonymous reviewers for valuable comments and suggestions on earlier version of this manuscript. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Víctor Abella. Departamento de Ciencias de la Educación. Universidad de Burgos. 09001 Burgos (Spain). E-mail: [email protected]

926 SPANISH VALIDATION OF ANPS 927

Over the past few decades, personality evaluation has psychological states of Seeking, Sexual , Care, , been dominated by questionnaires linked to the lexical Sadness, Anger and Playfulness (Panksepp, 1998, 2000). approach. According to this approach, the most relevant Each one is regulated by systems placed in different brain aspects that differentiate some people from others appear zones in which several are responsible for in language. However, proposals based on biological models facilitating or inhibiting their activation. Thus, the activation have been advanced (e.g. Eysenck & Eysenck, 1987; Gray, of each cerebral circuit is mediated by a series of subcortical 1982, 1994). In these types of models, it is considered that and cortical structures where electro-chemical a biological substrate is associated with each personality will systematically trigger a behavior associated with the dimension that would explain the differences in these traits emotional state that the structure regulates (Panksepp, 2000). between some individuals and others. For example, at the level of cerebral structures, the activation and research within the lexical approach have of affective (Panksepp, 1998, 2006a) is mediated by centered the Big Five Personality Traits (Goldberg, 1990). the system of trans-hypothalamic FEAR (Panksepp, 2005), One of the main theoretical proposals of this theory is the which comprises the central and lateral areas of the , Five Factor Model (FFM) of Costa and McCrae (1985, 1992) , the medial and the periaqueductal gray and this model includes the following factors : , (Panksepp, 1998, 2006a). The stimulation or activation of Extraversion, Openness to experience , Agreeableness and this system generates of anxiety as well as avoidance Conscientiousness. In the explanation of their model, McCrae behavior. At a neurochemical level, glutamate, corticotropin , and Costa (1995) consider that personality traits are cholecystokinin, the diazepam binding inhibitor, the alpha- hypothetical constructs, with a biological basis. However, melanocyte stimulating hormone and the Y neuropeptide biological basis not occupy a central part of their theory, as intervene in the activation of the FEAR system (for in-depth they consider that not enough is known of the information, see Panksepp, 1998 , 2004). and of neurotransmitters to be able to make satisfactory predictions. One of the biggest criticisms of Costa and The Affective Neuroscience Personality Scales McCrae’s theory is that its dimensions are not firmly grounded (ANPS): an assessment tool in a biological substrate (e.g. Eysenck, 1995). The psycho- biological proposals of personality share the idea that each Recent findings in the field of that support personality dimension is supported by a biological function basic emotional traits, join to greater knowledge of the (e.g. Eysenck & Eysenck, 1987; Gray, 1982, 1994). subcortical systems involved in the led Panksepp At present, the development of techniques and his colleagues to develop a personality assessment tool have opened up new approaches to physiological systems constructed on affective substrates. They conceived this that underpin the different personality traits, being tool with the idea of evaluating temperamental variability Neuroticism and Extraversion the two dimensions which related to the emotions, which would reflect the activity received more (e.g. Canli et al. , 2001; Deckersbach of subcortical emotional systems (Davis et al., 2003). et al., 2006; Johnson et al. , 1999). Based on the dimensions proposed in the State Trait Thanks to neuroscientific advances , the Affective Personality Inventory (STPI: Spielberger, 1975), and in Neuroscience Personality Scales (Davis, Panksepp , & accordance with the investigation into affective neuroscience Normansell, 2003) are presented as scales which link (Panksepp, 1998), the authors constructed a questionnaire subcortical emotional systems to each of the dimensions that represents six basic affective tendencies tendencies that Panksepp proposed for his theory (Panksepp, 1998). (Davis et al., 2003): PLAYFULNESS, SEEKING, CARE, FEAR, ANGER and SADNESS. Capitalization is an Affective Personality Traits of the Panksepp model established convention for labeling, each one referring to a specific and well established basic neuronal system Panksepp (1998) considers that the basic emotive and (Panksepp, 1998). affective aspects found in any mammal could form the core As well as these six affective tendencies, the authors for the study of the human personality. Based on this added Spirituality as a seventh scale, as they consider that assumption, researchers may study brain substrate in animal it is an important aspect in people’s emotional life and models , so as to link human personality with reliable because they thought that it could have great importance neurobiological foundations. in psychiatric research, as its great importance has been From advances in affective neuroscience, Panksepp confirmed in the treatment of alcoholism (Kendler et al., established seven basic instinctive needs or emotional 2003; Miller & Thoresen, 2003). responses: seeking food for sustenance; a need to reproduce; Davis et al. (2003) considered that a tool such as this to protect offspring; to try to recover a family member after may be limited, due to the enormous evolutionary progress a separation; to avoid and destruction; to affirm one’s that the human brain has accumulated, although it has been position to protect one’s interests; to maintain social relations demonstrated that there are many similarities in the systems with family members. Associated with these needs are the that regulate the basic emotions and of mammals 928 ABELLA, PANKSEPP, MANGA, BáRCENA, AND IGLESIAS

(MacLean, 1990; Panksepp, 1998). It is true that other factor models were tested; the first had better fit indexes affective systems have been defined in relation to thirst, than the second. The indexes obtained by the seven-factor hunger, thermal regulation, , , etc. however, these model (NFI = .74; GFI = .83; AGFI = .80; RMSEA = .08) were not included in the scales. First because the authors showed that the fit of the model is not perfect, but may be considered these systems more motivational than affective considered acceptable. The goodness-of-fit indexes are much and, second , because the neurological evidence available to poorer for the two-factor model (NFI = .54; GFI = .70; date is insufficient to include these dimensions in an evaluation AGFI = .65; RMSEA = .12). Therefore, the seven-factor tool that seeks, on a biological basis, to confirm the influence model had better goodness of fit than the two-factor model . of the most basic emotions in the temperamental variability There were significant gender differences in the ANPS of human beings (Davis et al., 2003). scales. Men scored higher than women on SEEKING scale The original validation study (Davis et al., 2003) included (Davis et al., 2003) and on PLAYFULNESS scale (Pahlavan two samples, university students and job applicants; comparing et al. , 2008) , while women were higher on CARE and the ANPS with the Big Five Model (Goldberg, 1992). The SADNESS scales, (Davis et al., 2003; Pahlavan et al. , 2008). Exploratory Factorial Analysis (EFA), which included the In the original study, women also scored higher on scales for the Big Five Model and the ANPS, revealed four Spirituality, whereas in the French version they scored higher factors: Low emotional stability, Agreeableness, Extraversion on FEAR scale . and Openness to experience. The first factor was formed by The aim of the present study was to validate the Spanish the three dimensions of the negative affects of the ANPS adaptation of the Affective Neuroscience Personality Scales. (FEAR, ANGER, SADNESS) together with Emotional Thus, we evaluated the psychometric properties of the scales, stability, which loaded negatively. The second factor, named their factorial structure and their construct validity. Agreeableness, consisted of Agreeableness together with CARE and ANGER, the latter with negative loading. In the third factor, there were significant saturations of the dimension Method Extraversion, together with CARE and PLAYFULNESS. Finally, the factor named Openness to experience was Participants integrated by that same dimension of the Big Five Model and by SEEKING. When the analysis was forced to a five- Participants in the study were university students from factor solution, the dimension Conscientiousness formed a the Faculty of Education, the Faculty of Work Sciences fifth factor by itself, which also occurred in the French and the Nursing School of the Universidad de León. A total validation of the scales (Pahlavan, Mouchiroud, Zenasni, & of 411 university students completed the questionnaires. Panksepp, 2008). In the French validation of ANPS, the four Nine of the questionnaires were eliminated because they remaining factors presented a similar configuration to the had not been properly completed or were incomplete, such original scales. The first factor was composed of the that the final sample was composed of 402 participants dimensions considered as negative both in the ANPS and in (221 women and 181 men). Their ages were between 18 the Big Five Model (Emotional stability, FEAR, ANGER, and 48 years old ( M = 22.6, SD = 3.43). and SADNESS) although CARE also presented a saturation of .35 for this factor. In the second factor, Extraversion and Translation of the scales PLAYFULNESS presented the highest loadings, together with ANGER, which also showed significant saturation for We applied an inverse translation process in order to this factor. In the third factor, Agreeableness, CARE and translate the items in the ANPS (Hambleton, 2005). Two ANGER, which loaded negatively, showed significant expert translators were separately asked to translate the saturations. Finally, the fourth factor was composed of questionnaire from the source language (English) to the target Openness, SEEKING and Spirituality. language (Spanish). Once completed, the translations were Including only the ANPS , with the exception of compared to achieve consensus over the final wording for Spirituality, Davis et al. (2003) carried out a EFA, and two each item. On the basis of this preliminary version, a bilingual factors emerged with eigenvalue greater than 1. These two translator conducted an inverse translation from the target factors represented negative affect and positive affect. FEAR, language back into the source language. This translation SADNESS and ANGER were found in the first factor , was compared with the original scale to examine its similarity whereas the second factor included PLAYFULNESS, CARE (Hambleton, 2005) and to make any necessary modifications. and SEEKING . Having completed the definitive wording, expert opinions Davis et al. (2003) did not conduct a Confirmatory were pronounced on the scales. Three experts were asked Factorial Analysis (CFA) to determine the goodness-of-fit to state the dimensions to which each item belonged and of either the seven-factor or the two-factor model. The first whether or not the items were understandable in themselves, CFA conducted on the scales was for the French validation being free to make any suggestions that they considered (Pahlavan et al., 2008). Both the seven-factor and the two- applicable. SPANISH VALIDATION OF ANPS 929

Instruments factorial analysis of the NEO-PI R (Costa & McCrae, 1999). As its predecessor, the NEO-FFI-R evaluates, Spanish version of the ANPS through 12-item scales, five personality factors: The scale assesses six principal emotions and Spirituality : Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness and PLAYFULNESS. Defined as showing itself generally Conscientiousness. According to the degree of agreement to be fun and playful. or disagreement with the preceding sentence, each item SEEKING. This dimension is defined by feelings of is scored on a five-point Likert scale (A, B, C, D, E), , exploring objects and environments, a liking of new where A is the highest degree of disagreement and E the experiences and a sense of being able to reach almost anything. greatest degree of agreement. From among the 12 items CARE: Conceptualized as maternity, including a liking proposed for each scale, half are positively formulated for children, feelings of helping others, and a towards the factor (0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 points respectively of being needed by others. given to the alternatives A to E) and the other half present FEAR: Defined by feelings of anxiety, concern, a negative wording towards the factor (with 4, 3, 2, 1 and indecision, over events in the past, lack of 0 points given to alternatives A to E, respectively). After and not being brave enough. recoded inversely formulated items, a total score can be ANGER: This dimension is characterized by a facility obtained for each dimension. to show anger and irritation, remaining angry for long periods of time and . It is also characterized by Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) (Watson, the expression of verbal and physical anger. Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) SADNESS: In this dimension, feelings of and Positive Affect and Negative Affect were assessed using unease predominate and of not feeling loved by others. A the Spanish version (Sandín et al., 1999), modified in its tendency to weep frequently and to think about past loved 20 adjectives with an explanatory parenthesis for each ones is also present. adjective (Bárcena, 2006). The PANAS questionnaire has Spirituality: This dimension is defined by feelings of 20 adjectives, 10 of which describe positive moods and unity with creation and with humanity, by an effort to feel the other 10 describe negative moods. The response to each at peace and in harmony with oneself, to be guided by adjective is on a five-point Likert scale, from nothing (1) spiritual principles and by a search for the of life. to a lot (5). Subscale scorings can be computing by summing The total questionnaire has 112 items, and responses scores across all 10 items. are made on a four-point Likert scale: A totally disagree to D totally agree . All the scales have 14 items, with the Procedure exception of Spirituality that comprises 12 items. In all the scales, half of the items are expressed directly and the Participation in the study was voluntary and entailed other half are expressed in negative wording towards the the possibility of gaining credits for participating in the factor. The scale also presents 16 filler items or distractors, investigation. Students responded individually to three with the intention of controlling for validity and to respond questionnaires in the classroom in a single one-hour session. to questions of interest for the authors. Individual scores At all times, student anonymity was guaranteed so that their can be calculated following the steps described in Davis et answers would be as truthful as possible, and confidentiality al. (2003). of data handling was also guaranteed for participants. The correction of the questionnaires was completed by the Revised NEO-Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI-R) authors of the investigation. This questionnaire comes from a revision of the psychometric properties of the Spanish adaption of the Statistical analysis NEO-FFI developed by Bárcena (2006). The questionnaire keeps the original 60 items, but some of them were LISREL 8.8 (Scientific Software International, 2006) replaced by others that presented greater strength in the was used to perform the CFA. As the ANPS have a high

Table 1 Goodness-of-fit indexes of the seven vs. two-factor models Model Chi-Square df p RMSEA NNFI (TLI) CFI SRMR 7 Factors 908.66 303 < .001 .071 .90 .91 .075 2 Factors 1391.96 289 < .001 .11 .80 .81 .11 Note. RMSEA = Root Mean Square Error of Approximation; NNFI = Non-Normed Fit Index; TLI = Tucker-Lewis Index; CFI = Comparative Fit Index; SRMR = Standard Root Mean Square Residual. 930 ABELLA, PANKSEPP, MANGA, BáRCENA, AND IGLESIAS number of items ( n = 112), we chose to use a method of Table 2 regrouping known as parceling , with the aim of reducing Standardized regression coefficients of the parcels for the the number of indicators by factor (Marsh, Hau, Balla, & 7-factor model Grayson, 1998) , so as to increase the ratio between the Parcela β R2 number of participants and the number of variables (Bandalos, 2002). On that basis, we chose a technique known as A Priori SK SK1 .32 .10 Questionnaire Construction (Little, Cunningham, Shahar, SK2 .32 .10 &Widaman, 2002). By means of this technique, when parcels SK3 .26 .08 are created for each item that is included, that is positively SK4 .22 .03 worded for the factor, another negatively worded one should SK5 .29 .10 be included, thereby reducing the acquiescence effect. SK6 .32 .13 Several fit indexes have been proposed to determine SK7 .26 .05 the goodness-of-fit of the model in order to overcome the CA CA1 .26 .04 limitations of the Chi-squared test ( χ2) (McDonald & Ho, CA2 .31 .06 2002), being the most widely used: TLI (Tucker-Lewis CA3 .36 .12 Index), CFI (Comparative Fit Index), and RMSEA (Root CA4 .34 .07 Mean Square Error of Approximation) (Schreiber, Stage, CA5 .30 .07 King, Nora , & Barlow, 2006). These indexes evaluate the CA6 .35 .12 proportional increase in the fit comparing our model with CA7 .34 .11 a null model in which none of the observed variables PL PL1 .36 .10 correlate with each other. The following cut-off points were PL2 .23 .04 proposed to determined the goodness-of-fit of the model: PL3 .31 .06 RMSEA < .06, TLI > .95, CFI > .95 and Standard Root PL4 .44 .33 Mean Square Residual (SRMR) < .08 (Hu & Bentler, 1999; PL5 .41 .27 Schreiber et al., 2002). PL6 .36 .17 Parallel analysis was used for the EFA, given that it is PL7 .31 .15 the most precise method to decide the number of factors FR FR1 .28 .04 (Eaton, Velicer , & Fava, 1999). FACTOR 7.2 software FR2 .37 .20 package (Lorenzo-Seva, & Ferrando, 2006) was used in FR3 .26 .03 order to perform the parallel analysis. FR4 .11 .00 FR5 .29 .08 FR6 .36 .12 Results FR7 .35 .12 AN AN1 .29 .05 ANPS factorial structure AN2 .40 .24 AN3 .21 .02 On the basis of the technique used to prepare the parcels, AN4 .38 .16 7 parcels were created with two-items for each factor, AN5 .29 .09 whereas for Spirituality 6 were created because it had 12 AN6 .34 .10 items. Two models were evaluated through the maximum AN7 .24 .04 likelihood method. The first model contained the 7-factor SA SA1 .35 .14 proposed in the questionnaire (SEEKING, FEAR, CARE, SA2 .42 .18 ANGER, PLAYFULNESS, SADNESS and Spirituality). SA3 .28 .08 The second model was the two-factor model observed by SA4 .22 .03 Davis et al. (2003). This model proposes two factors; one SA5 .35 .14 which represents positive affect (SEEKING, CARE and SA6 .25 .04 PLAYFULNESS) and another that represents negative affect SA7 .21 .02 (FEAR, ANGER, SADNESS). SP SP1 .25 .03 Table 1 summarizes the most representative goodness- SP2 .31 .08 of-fit indexes. As can be seen, none of the models presents a SP3 .33 .08 perfect fit, although in both cases were acceptable. In any SP4 .55 .42 case, the 7-factor solution had better indexes than the SP5 .47 .32 bidimensional model, which showed a fall in the fit indexes. SP6 .40 .21 In this sense, the goodness-of-fit of the 7-factor model indicates Note . SK: SEEKING; CA: CARE; PL: PLAYFULNESS; FR: that this model fits the data better than the other solution. FEAR; AN: ANGER; SA: SADNESS; SP: Spirituality. SPANISH VALIDATION OF ANPS 931

Table 3 Correlations matrix between factors (upper part of the diagonal). Correlations between the ANPS scale (lower part of the diagonal) SEEK FEAR CARE ANGER PLAY SADNESS Spirituality SEEK — .45 .68 –.05 .71 .21 –.06 FEAR .35* — .50 .38 .11 .81 .16 CARE .51* .37* —–.09 .55 .51 .19 ANGER .01 .30* –.01 —–.22 .50 .21 PLAY .57* .12* .43* –.08 — .38 .24 SADNESS .20 .57* .40* .31* .05* — .27 Spirituality .02 .15* .20* .16* –.11* .23 — Note. * Correlations are significant at p < .05.

Table 4 Reliability coefficient (alpha), mean scores and standard deviations (SD) Alpha Women Men t df p Women Men MM SD SD SEEK .73 40.41 39.02 –2.96 400 .003 4.92 4.42 FEAR .71 39.04 36.13 –6.36 400 .001 4.95 4.04 CARE .74 41.69 38.45 –6.14 400 .001 5.41 5.07 ANGER .74 34.86 34.35 –.99 400 .321 5.46 4.59 PLAY .75 41.66 41.23 –.78 400 .437 5.40 5.64 SADNESS .74 38.29 35.39 –5.98 400 .001 5.14 4.40 Spirituality .75 28.09 26.81 –2.45 400 .014 5.49 4.86

The standardized values of the regression coefficients that these correlations may be taken as evidence of the of the parcels for the 7-factor model are presented in Table nomological validity of the scales. 2. All the coefficients were statistically significant , ranged from .11 to .55, whereas the variance ranged from .00 to Psychometric properties of the scales .45. Thus, some of the coefficient values were relatively low, which indicates that the contribution of the parcel to Gender differences in ANPS scales are presented in Table the variance of the latent factor is not sufficient. 4, together with their mean scores and standard deviations, Correlation coefficients were calculated for all the latent and alpha coefficients of internal consistency (Cronbach’s variables (Table 3) to test the nomological validity. The alpha) in the measurements for men and women . Reliabilities highest coefficient ( r = .81) is given between FEAR and of the scales ranged from .71 to .78, situating in all cases SADNESS, followed by PLAYFULNESS and SEEKING in ranges that are considered acceptable for psychological (r = .71), CARE and SEEKING (r = .68), CARE and tests (Cortina, 1993). Gender differences were explored PLAYFULNESS (r = .55), SADNESS and CARE ( r = .51), through the t test for independent samples, and there were CARE and FEAR ( r = .50) , and between ANGER and significant differences. Women had higher scores in the SADNESS (r = .50). In sum, the dimensions of the positive affective dimensions of SEEKING (t = – 2.96, p < .003), affects present high correlations between each other, in the FEAR ( t = – 6.36, p < .001 ), CARE ( t = – 6.14, p < .001 ) same way as happens between the negative affects. High and SADNESS ( t = – 5.98, p < .001 ). Women also obtained correlations also appear between CARE and two dimensions higher scores on Spirituality ( t = – 2.45, p < .01). Thus, of the negative affects, which are FEAR and SADNESS. women scored higher than men on five of the seven scales These results are congruent with those found in the of the questionnaire, and the most notable differences were development of the original scales (Davis et al., 2003), so on FEAR, CARE and SADNESS. 932 ABELLA, PANKSEPP, MANGA, BáRCENA, AND IGLESIAS

The ANPS intercorrelations matrix may be examined in Table 5 Table 3. The scales included under positive affect (SEEKING , Factor loadings for exploratory factor analysis with Direct PLAYFULNESS and CARE) were related. On the other Oblimin rotation of NEO-FFI-R and ANPS hand, the scales included under negative affect (FEAR, Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 ANGER and SADNESS) also correlated in a highly significant way between each other. All of this corroborates Neuroticism .67 the idea that both positive and negative affect could be higher- Extraversion .60 order personality factors (Davis et al., 2003). Spirituality, Openness .35 however, correlated in a positive way with CARE and with Agreeableness .65 the three negative dimensions. On the contrary, this scale Conscientiousness correlated in a negative way to PLAYFULNESS . SEEK .63 FEAR .68 Relationships between ANPS and NEO-FFI-R CARE .33 .34 .46 ANGER –.51 .35 Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for NEO-FFI-R subscales PLAY .89 were high, ranged from .71 to .84, which indicates good SADNESS .77 internal consistency for the scales. Spirituality .32 Correlation coefficients between ANPS and NEO-FFI- Note . Loadings lower than .30 are not presented. R were calculated. Neuroticism was significantly related to the three dimensions of the ANPS that are considered as having negative affect: FEAR ( r = .46), ANGER ( r = presented a significant loading (.34) in this first factor, .36) and SADNESS ( r = .56). Besides, Extraversion showed although its loading was shared in a significant way between positive and significant correlations to the three dimensions the three factors. The second factor included Openness and considered as having positive affect in the ANPS: SEEKING Agreeableness together with ANGER, the last one with (r = .36), CARE ( r = .29) and PLAY ( r = .57). Openness negative loading. As pointed out earlier, CARE also presents correlated significantly positive with all the subscales of a significant loading in this second factor. Finally, the third the ANPS, except with ANGER . Openness presented its factor included the dimension Neuroticism together with strongest correlations with SEEKING ( r = .37 ) and CARE Spirituality and the three negative dimensions of the ANPS (r = .30). Agreeableness correlated in a positive way with (FEAR, ANGER and SADNESS), although ANGER had the three positive dimensions of the ANPS: SEEKING ( r a significant loading on the second and the third factors. = .18), CARE ( r = .31) and PLAY ( r = .25). However Finally, Conscientiousness has no significant presence in Agreeableness showed the highest correlation, in a negative any of the extracted factors. way , to ANGER (r = -.41) . Finally, Conscientiousness Although the parallel analysis proposed a 3-factor correlated in a positive and significant way with SEEKING solution, we decided to perform a bi-factorial solution to (r = .21) and CARE (r = .14), two positive dimensions of evaluate the two-factor model proposed by Davis et al. the ANPS. (2003). First factor was composed of the dimensions that None of the variables included in the EFA showed a represent the negative affect (Neuroticism, FEAR, ANGER kurtosis greater than one in absolute values, which means and SADNESS), whereas the positive affect were well the EFA may be carried out on the basis of the Pearson represented in the other factor (Extraversion, Agreeableness, correlation matrices. The value of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Openness, SEEKING, CARE and PLAYFULNESS). index was .72, meaning that the correlations matrix was Spirituality was situated in the first factor, whereas acceptable to perform the factorial analysis. The analysis Conscientiousness was not represented in any of the two showed that it was not sufficient to assume a normal factors. The correlation between these factors was very multivariant distribution, given that the multivariant kurtosis low ( r = .04), which indicates that they may be considered coefficient was 195.05 ( Z = 14.70; p < .05). For this reason, independent factors. we chose the Unweighted Least Squares method to perform the factorial extraction. Parallel analysis (Lattin, Carroll, Relationships between ANPS and PANAS & Green, 2003) was also computed and results indicated that the 3-factor solution was the most acceptable. To obtain The reliability of PANAS, evaluated with Cronbach’s the rotated solution the oblique factorial rotation method alpha, yielded an alpha of .75 for Positive Affect and an used was Direct Oblimin. alpha of .81 for Negative Affect. Correlations between A factorial weight equal to or over .30 was established PANAS and the ANPS scales were calculated. Positive as a significant saturation criterion . Thus, as can be seen Affect correlated significantly positive with SEEKING ( r in Table 5, the first factor included Extraversion and the = .22), CARE ( r = .14) and PLAY ( r = .22), in other words dimensions SEEKING and PLAYFULNESS. CARE also with the three positive dimensions of the ANPS . On the SPANISH VALIDATION OF ANPS 933 other hand, only two dimensions considered as negative, Thus, it may be hypothesized that the roots of the dimension FEAR (r = .19) and SADNESS (r = .15), correlated in a Agreeableness, as it is expressed in the Five Factor Model, positive and significant way with Negative Affect. could be the system underlying the affective dimension of An EFA was carried out on the combined ANPS and ANGER (i.e. the ANGER System). Similar hypotheses may PANAS scales, following a similar method to that used in equally will be made for the other dimensions of the ANPS, the analysis of the ANPS and the NEO-FFI-R, to test the because , as the original authors affirm (Davis et al., 2003) bifactorial structure of the affects proposed by Davis et al. and as has been confirmed in the French validation (Pahlavan (2003). In this case, the value of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin et al., 2008), each of the ANPS dimensions relates to at least index was .71. The kurtosis coefficient reached a value of one of the Five Factor Model dimensions. 100.71 ( Z = 16.35; p < .05), so we chose Unweighted Least The results obtained in factorial analysis shows an Squares as factor extraction method. The results of parallel association among Agreeableness, CARE and ANGER, even analysis suggested that two factors underlay the correlation though the correlations between CARE and ANGER are matrix. The two components obtained after rotation (Direct practically inexistent (see Table 3). These results support Oblimin) resulted in factors for negative affect and positive the conclusions proposed by Davis et al . (2003) that affirm affect. The first component can be identified as negative the independence of these two systems, as many clinical affect factor. Four scales had primarily loadings in this factor: studies indicate that people often express both feelings Negative Affect (.57), FEAR (.80), ANGER (.42) and simultaneously. Thus, they proposed that the dimension SADNESS (.72). No other scales had high secondary loadings Agreeableness should integrate the dimensions CARE and on this factor. The second factor can be identified with ANGER, although the feelings related to CARE would be positive affect because was formed by Positive Affect (.30), situated at the positive pole and feelings related to ANGER PLAY (.78), CARE (.56) and SEEKING (.74). No other at the negative pole. scales had high secondary loadings on this second component. Our findings support the existence of a common bifactorial structure between the ANPS and the PANAS scales. The data allow us to observe positive links between Discussion Negative Affect and the negative dimensions of the ANPS. Besides, results showed the existence of positive links In this study, we have developed the Spanish validation between the positive dimensions of the ANPS and Positive of the ANPS, considered as an initial attempt to develop Affect. We also found this same bifactorial structure between an emotional personality scale based on scientific evidence the ANPS and the NEO-FFI-R and obtained relatively high drawn from the (Panksepp, 1998). Validity associantions between the positive dimensions of the ANPS and reliability obtained reveal adequate psychometric and the Five Factor Model (Extraversion, Openness and properties of Spanish translation of the ANPS. The results Agreeableness ). Moreover, we found positive relationships obtained in the CFA support the original factorial structure between the dimensions that are considered negative in proposed by the authors (Davis et al., 2003). the ANPS and Neuroticism (NEO-FFI-R). All of this The intercorrelation analysis indicates the strong indicates that the ANPS presents good concurrent validity. associations between the Five Factor Model of Costa and The ANPS showed an adequate construct validity of McCrae and the ANPS. Results showed that the dimensions the ANPS, the results support the bifactorial structure of of the ANPS correlate with those of the NEO-FFI-R scales the scales (Davis et al., 2003), showed two factors which in a similar way to the original study (Davis et al., 2003), basically replicate the factors for negative and positive affect although a scale of adjectives developed from a proposal proposed by Watson, Clark , and Tellegen (1984, 1988). by Goldberg (1992) was used in the original study. Factorial In brief, the results corresponding to the Spanish analysis supported these relationships between ANPS and validation of the ANPS are highly satisfactory. Internal NEO-FFI-R . Our results support the strong relationship of validity, concurrent validity, reliability, evaluated with Extraversion with SEEKING and above all with Cronbach’s alpha , and structural validity are very similar PLAYFULNESS; and also support the strong association to those obtained in the original scales. Thus, we have a of Neuroticism with FEAR and SADNESS. The strong personality assessment questionnaire from the emotional intercorrelation between FEAR and SADNESS (see Table point of view , based on neuronal substrates, a tool that offers 3) indicates that humans do not differentiate between strong us the possibility of being able to link human personality feelings associated with the systems underlying FEAR and to reliable neurobiological foundations. In these same lines, SADNESS. These results corroborate the idea advanced by Panksepp (1998, 2005, 2006a), integrating studies in animals Davis et al . (2003) , which suggests these affects are very and humans, has described the underlying cerebral systems similar at a neurological level. and the neurochemical basis of the personality traits proposed The association between Openness to experience and in the ANPS. Research in this area showed a strong link Spirituality has also been supported, and finally, we found a between testosterone levels and SEEKING (Reuter et al., strong inverse association between ANGER and Agreeableness. 2005); the importance of the dopaminergic pathways and 934 ABELLA, PANKSEPP, MANGA, BáRCENA, AND IGLESIAS the size of the amygdala on ANGER was showed at a [Association of suicidal ideation in with personal factors, genetic level (Reuter, Weber, Fiebach, Elger, & Montag, perfectionism and negative affect]. (Doctoral thesis ). 2009); and some findings revealed a strong interaction Universidad de León , Spain. Retrieved from http://www.redined. between both the oxytocin receptor gene and the serotonin mec.es/ mostrar.php?registro=46021 polymorphism transporter and FEAR and SADNESS Canli, T., Zhao, Z., Desmond, J. E., Kang, E. J., Gross, J., & (Montag, Fiebach, Kirsch, & Reuter, 2011). Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2001). An fMRI study of personality Owing to the above reasons, the ANPS can help to look influences on brain reactivity to emotional stimuli. Behavioral for the biological substrate of the Five Factors proposed Neuroscience , 115 (1), 33-42. doi: 10.1037//0735-7044.115.1.33 by Costa and McCrae, as one of the strongest criticisms Cortina, J. M. (1993) . What is coefficient alpha? An examination made of this model is that its dimensions are not formulated of theory and applications. Journal of , on the basis of a biological substrate (e.g. Eysenck, 1995). 78 (1), 98-104. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.98 So, as pointed out above, ANGER and Agreeableness could Costa, P. T. , & McCrae, R. R. (1985). The NEO Personality share the same underlying system. Reuter et al. (2009) Inventory manual . Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment showed the biological bases of the dimension ANGER at Resources. a molecular level and through the size of the left amygdala, Costa, P. T. , & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality such that it may be hypothesized that these same bases can Inventory (NEO-PI-R), and NEO Five-Factor Inventory: have their influence on the dimension Agreeableness. professional manual . Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Following a similar logic, we might hypothesize that if Resources. testosterone has been related to SEEKING (Reuter et al ., Costa, P. T. , & McCrae R. R. (1999). NEO-PI R, Inventario de 2005) it could also have a certain influence on Extraversion. Personalidad NEO revisado. NEO-FFI, Inventario NEO This same reasoning may also apply to the dimension reducido de Cinco Factores [Revised NEO Personality Inventory Neuroticism, the genetic bases of which could be the same, (NEO-PI-R), and NEO Five-Factor Inventory]. Madrid, Spain: or at least partly the same, as those established for FEAR TEA Ediciones. and SADNESS (Montag et al. , 2011). Davis, K. L., Panksepp, J., & Normansell, L. (2003). The Affective The results should be interpreted with care, as their Neuroscience Personality Scales: Normative data and generalization may be limited, owing to the sample having implications. Neuro-Psychoanalysis , 5(1), 57-69. been taken solely from among university students. Deckersbach, T ., Miller, K. K., Klibanski, A., Fischman, A., Nevertheless, we consider that this scale offers a tool that Dougherty, D. D., Blais, M. A., … Rauch, S. L. (2006). can make important contributions to psychiatric investigation, Regional cerebral brain metabolism correlates of neuroticism as for example, the success of many psychotherapeutic and extraversion. and Anxiety , 23 (3), 133-138. interventions might depend on preexisting emotional states doi:10.1002/da .20152 of . Furthermore, exits the possibility that individual Eaton, C. A., Velicer, W. F., & Fava, J. L. (1999). Determining differences in certain temperamental tendencies facilitate the number of components: an evaluation of parallel analysis the appearance of repressive patterns or neurotic defense and the minimum average partial correlation procedures . mechanisms (Davis et al., 2003). Panksepp (1998 , 2006b), Unpublished manuscript. based on scientific evidence, has proposed a scheme for Eysenck, H. J. (1995). How valid is the psychoticism scale? A the way the emotional systems of his theory could be related comment on the Van Kampen critique. European Journal of to different psychiatric disorders. Thus, the following step Personality , 9(2), 103-108. doi :10.1002/per.2410090204 is to test the scales in other samples and, above all, explore Eysenck, H. J. , & Eysenck, M. W. (1987). Personalidad y if the ANPS can serve as the basis for different psychiatric diferencias individuales [Personality and individual differences]. diagnoses. Thus, we would encourage other researchers to Madr id, Spain: Ediciones Pirámide. follow up this line of work, given our belief that in Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: combination with other techniques, the ANPS can help in The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social understanding different personality and affective disorders Psychology , 59(6), 1216-1229. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.59.6.1216 in a more precise manner. Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers of the Big- Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment , 4(1), 26-42. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26 References Gray, J. A. (1982). The of anxiety: an enquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system. New York, Bandalos, D. L. (2002). The effects of item parceling on goodness- NY: Oxford University Press. of-fit and parameter estimate bias in structural equation Gray, J. A. (1994). Three fundamental emotion systems. In P. modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Ekman & R. Davidson (Eds.) , The nature of emotion (pp. 243- Journal , 9(1), 78-102. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0901_5 247). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Bárcena, C. (2006). Asociación de la ideación suicida en adultos Hambleton, R. K. (2005). Issues, designs and technical guidelines con factores personales, perfeccionismo y afecto negativo for adapting test into multiple languages and cultures. In R. SPANISH VALIDATION OF ANPS 935

K. Hambleton, P. F. Merenda , & S. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Panksepp, J. (2000). Emotions as natural kinds within the Adapting educational and psychological test for cross-cultural mammalian brain. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), assessment (pp 3-38). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Handbook of Emotions (2 nd ed.) (pp. 137-156) New York, Associates. NY: The Guilford Press. Hu, L. T. , & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indices Panksepp, J. (2004). Textbook of biological . New York, in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus NY: Wiley. new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling , 6(1), 1-55. Panksepp, J. (2005). Affective consciousness: Core emotional doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118 feelings in animals and humans. Consciousness and Cognition , Johnson, D . L., Wiebe, J. S. , Gold, S. M., Andreasen, N. C., 14 , 30-80. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2004.10.00 Hichwa, R. D., Watkins, G. L., & Ponto, L. L. B. (1999). Panksepp, J. (2006a). The core emotional systems of the mammalian Cerebral blood and personality: A positron emission brain: The fundamental substrates of human emotions. In J. tomography study. American Journal of Psychiatry , 156 , 252- Corrigall, H. Payne , & H. Wilkinson (Eds.), About a body: 257. Working with the embodied mind in (pp. 14- Kendler, K. S., Liu, X-Qi., Gardner, C. O., McCullough, M. E., 32). London, UK: Routledge. Larson, D., & Prescott, C. A. (2003). Dimensions of religiosity Panksepp, J. (2006b). Emotional endophenotypes in evolutionary and their relationship to lifetime psychiatric and substance psychiatry. Progress in Neuro-Psycopharmacology & Biological use disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry , 160 , 496-503. Psychiatry , 30 , 774-784. doi:10.1016/j.pnpbp.2006.01.00 doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.160.3.496 Reuter, M., Panksepp, J., Schnabel, N., Kellerhoff, N., Kempel, Lattin, J., Carroll, D. J., & Green, P. E. (2003). Analyzing P. , & Henning, J. (2005). Personality and biological markers multivariate data . Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury Press. of creativity. European Journal of Personality , 19 (2), 83-95. Little T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. doi:10.1002/per.534 (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, Reuter, M., Weber, B., Fiebach, C. J., Elger, C., & Montag, C. weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling , 9(2), 78- (2009). The biological basis of anger: Associations with the 102. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_1 gene coding for DARPP-32 (PPP1R1B) and with amygdala Lorenzo-Seva, U. , & Ferrando, P. J. (2006). FACTOR: A computer volume. Behavioral Brain Research , 202 (2), 179-183. program to fit the exploratory factor analysis model. Behavior doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2009.03.032 Research Methods, Instruments and Computers , 38 (1), 88- Sandin, B., Chorot, P., Lostao, L., Joiner, T. E., Santed, M. A., & 91. doi:10.3758/BF03192753 Valiente, R. M. (1999). Escalas PANAS de afecto positivo y MacLean, P. (1990). The Triune Brain in Evolution . New York, negativo: Validación factorial y convergencia transcultural [The NY: Plenum Press. PANAS scales of positive and negative affect: Factor analytic Marsh, H. W., Hau, K., Balla, J. R., & Grayson, D. (1998). Is validation and cross/cultural convergence]. Psicothema , 11 (1), more ever too much? The number of indicators per factor in 37-51. Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Schreiber, J. B., Stage, F. K., King, J., Nora, A., & Barlow, E. A. Research , 33 (2), 181-220. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr3302_1 (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory McCrae, R. R. , & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1995). Trait explanations in factor analysis results: A review. The Journal of Educational personal psychology. European Journal of Personality , 9(4), Research , 99 (6), 323-337. doi:10.3200/JOER.99.6.323-338 231-252. doi: 10.1002/per.2410090402 Scientific Software International (2006). LISREL, v. 8.8 [Computer McDonald, R. P. , & Ho, M. R. (2002). Principles and practice in Program]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International. reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods , Spielberger, C. D. (1975). The measurement of state and trait 7(1), 71-82 . doi:10.1037//1082-989X.7.1.64 anxiety: Conceptual and methodological issues. In L. Levi Miller, W. R. , & Thoresen, C. E. (2003). Spirituality, religion, (Ed.), Emotions: Their parameters and measurement . New and health: An emerging research field. American , York, NY: Raven Press. 58 (1), 24-35. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.58.1.24 Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1984). Cross-cultural Montag, C., Fiebach, C. J., Kirsch, P., & Reuter, M. (2011). convergence in the structure of : A Japanese replication Interaction of 5-HTTLPR and a variation on the oxytocin and a comparison with U.S. findings. Journal of Personality receptor gene influences negative . Biological and , 47 (1), 127-144. doi:10.1037/0022- Psychiatry , 69 (6), 901-603. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2010.10.026 3514.47.1.127 Pahlavan, F., Mouchiroud, C., Zenasni, F., & Panksepp, J. (2008). Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development Validation de l’adaptation française de l’échelle neuro-affective and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: de personnalité [French validation of the Affective Neuroscience The PANAS scales . Journal of Personality and Social Personality Scales (ANPS) ]. Revue Européene de Psychologie Psychology , 54 (6), 1063-1070. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063 Appliquée/European Review of Applied Psychology , 58 (3), 155-163. doi:10.1016/j.erap.2007.08.004 Received September 30, 2009 Panksepp, J. (1998). Affective Neuroscience . New York, NY: Oxford Revision received March 14, 2011 University Press. Accepted March 21, 2011