About the Measure

Domains Mental health and wellbeing
Key stages Key Stage 2, Key Stage 3, Key Stage 4, Key Stage 5
Subscales Positive affect (PA); Negative affect (NA); Physiological hyperarousal (PH)
Description A measure of children's positive affect, negative affect and physiological hyperarousal.
Example I get upset easily
Link https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1007584423617?LI=true
Psychometry
Implementation

Implementation details

No. of items 27
Format Likert
Respondent Self
Scoring Standardised
Time 0
Age 7-18
Cost single purchase Available in jou
Cost per child Available in jou

Psychometric details

UK norms No
Cronbach's α .77-.80
Test retest 1 week, r= [.68,.72]
Inter-rater reliability Not reported
EFA Not reported
CFA 3-factor model (RMSEA and CFI cannot be calculated as df>Chi-square)
Chi-square(321)=270.13
p=0.980
GFI=.93
RMSEA=.00
Cfit=1
CFI=1
RMR=.05
2-factor model
Chi-square(323)= 569.99
p> .001
GFI= .82
RMSEA= .05
Cfit= .44
CFI= .84
RMR= .07
Criterion validity Not reported
Construct validity Children's Depression Inventory with Affect and Arousal Scale for Children (AFARS) Positive Affect subscale, r= -.29 and Negative Affect subscale, r= -.40 and Physiological Hyperarousal subscale, r= .48; Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale with AFARS Negative Affect subscale, r=.46 and Physiological Hyperarousal subscale, r=.47
Concurrent validity Not reported
Predictive validity Not reported
Responsiveness Not reported
Floor/Ceiling Not reported
References Chorpita, B. F., Daleiden, E. L., Moffitt, C., Yim, L., & Umemoto, L. A. (2000). Assessment of tripartite factors of emotion in children and adolescents I: Structural validity and normative data of an affect and arousal scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 22(2), 141-160. doi:10.1023/a:1007584423617
Daleiden, E., Chorpita, B. F., & Lu, W. (2000). Assessment of tripartite factors of emotion in children and adolescents II: Concurrent validity of the affect and arousal scales for children. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 22(2), 161-182. doi:10.1023/a:1007536507687