Quiz 3: Measurement of Emotion

Content Validity Scenario

The PANAS covers everything its authors felt was relevant to measure affect, though other researchers may disagree.

Convergent Validity Scenario

Positive affect on the PANAS is positively correlated with the reward subscale of BAS.

Criterion Validity Scenario

Carver and White demonstrated that the BIS scale predicts anxiety about the cold-pressor task.

Discriminant Validity Scenario

Positive temperament is not correlated with responses on the BIS.

Face Validity Scenario

The pain scale in a hospital looks like what you would expect got a measure of pain.

Internal Reliability Scenario

The questions on the BIS scale relate to one another; the BAS subscales are also moderately points in time.

Interrater Reliability Scenario

The BARS requires at least two observers to agree on their ratings of the couple’s behavior. 

Test-Retest Reliability Scenario

BIS/BAS scores are moderately consistent when the same individuals are measured at different points in time. 

Mikels et al. attempted to establish discrete emotional labels for IAPS pictures. What was the main conclusion from this study? Identify a limitation of using the IAPS to elicit discrete emotions. 

The main conclusion was that only a small amount of images evoked single emotions while most evoked blended emotions. 

A limitation of using the IAPS is that not everyone will react to the same pictures the same way because of everyone’s subjective experiences. This could mean someone reacts to an image with one emotion, but someone else has two emotions. 

The IAPS relies on a dimensional approach to understanding emotion. Describe where each emotion listed below would be expected to fall on valence (positive, neutral, negative) and arousal (high or low) based on Mikels et al. and/or class discussion. 

a. Excitement:   Valence = Positive     Arousal = High 

b. Disgust:    Valence = Negative    Arousal = Low 

Reliability is necessary, but not sufficient, for validity. What does that statement mean? 

This means that a measure must have consistency across scores, times, or within itself before it can also be valid and show that it reflects the concept it was intended to assess.

The figure below illustrates the Facebook reaction buttons. Mark Zukerberg wants to assess the reliability and validity of this scale as a measure of FB users’ emotions. Which reliability and validity would you test and why?

I would test face validity to ensure that these buttons look like they measure emotions. I would test interrater reliability to see if the ratings between observers are consistent. Do people use the same button to react to the same thing?