|| Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid
The goal of these studies was to provide validity and reliability evidence of a modified Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) including a direction scale (PANAS-D). Study 1 tested the validity and reliability of the PANAS-D to measure both intensity and direction of affects. Study 2 examined the relationships between direction of affects and selected variables (i.e., coping, attainment of achievement goals and sport satisfaction) by controlling for intensity of affects.A total of 306 and 296 athletes (studies 1 and 2) completed the PANAS-D and other self-report questionnaires. Data were analysed with reliability, confirmatory factor analyses (study 1) and correlational analyses (studies 1 and 2).Cross-sectional with self-reported questionnaires.In study 1, the 4-factor structure of the PANAS-D (intensity and direction of positive affect and negative affect) fitted the data adequately. Multiple-group CFAs showed that PANAS-D was partially invariant across the two measurement occasions (before and after competition). The patterns of relationships between PANAS-D, attainment of achievement goals and coping provided evidence for the criterion-related validity of the PANAS-D. In study 2, direction of positive affect and negative affect were associated with selected outcomes (i.e., coping, attainment of sport achievement goals, and/or sport satisfaction) after intensity of these affective states were held constant.This study provided support for the reliability and validity of the PANAS-D (study 1) and the incremental validity of the direction of affective states (study 2), supporting the distinction between athletes' intensity and direction of affective states.CFAs revealed that the 4-factor structure of the PANAS-D fitted the data adequately.Intensity and direction of affects correlated with achievement goal, coping and satisfaction.Affect direction was associated with selected outcomes controlling for affect intensity.Affect intensity was associated with selected outcomes controlling for affect direction.The two studies strongly support the distinction between affect intensity and direction.