SELF-RATINGS VERSUS PEER-RATINGS OF SPECIFIC EMOTIONAL TRAITS - EVIDENCE OF CONVERGENT AND DISCRIMINANT VALIDITY

This study tested a hierarchical model of emotional experience by examining relations between self- and peer ratings on 8 factor-analytically derived affect scales. One hundred fifty Ss were assessed in 5-person groups, so that each self-rater was also judged by 4 peers. The raters were generally well-acquainted, but a minority of the judges knew their targets less well. The data showed both higher and lower order factors and thus supported a hierarchical view of rated affect. Specifically, (a) general Negative Affect and Positive Affect factors emerged in both the self- and peer ratings; (b) significant self-peer agreement was found for all 8 specific affect scales; and (c) despite the presence of substantial general factor variance, most of the scales also showed significant discriminant validity. Other analyses demonstrated that self-peer agreement increased with the addition of more peer raters and with greater judge-target acquaintance. Implications of the results for the validity of self- and peer ratings of affect are discussed.