4.1 Article

Validation of Pictorial Mood Assessment with Ottawa Mood Scales and the Positive and Negative Affect Scale for Young Adults

Journal

COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH JOURNAL
Volume 57, Issue 3, Pages 529-539

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10597-020-00679-4

Keywords

Emotion; Mood assessment; Scale validation; Psychological affect; Young adults

Funding

  1. University Tunku Abdul Rahman [6200/LM3]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to validate the Ottawa Mood Scales among non-native English speaking young adults in Malaysia, which showed good reliability and validity in measuring mood disorders symptoms, particularly in assessing negative emotions.
Pictorial mood assessments reduce the barriers of age, culture, gender and language fluency in the course of psychiatric assessments. This study sought to validate the Ottawa Mood Scales, a pictorial form of mood assessment questionnaire among non-native English speaking young adults in Malaysia. Since the Ottawa Mood Scales has not been previously validated, the convergent validity of the Ottawa Mood Scales was measured against the Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS), an established mood assessment instrument. A total of 129 young adults (aged 18-34) were recruited and completed an online survey with the Ottawa Mood Scales and PANAS questionnaires. Exploratory factor analysis indicated that the Ottawa Mood Scales has a one-dimensional structure and that a four-item model demonstrated higher reliability than the original 5-item model. Scores on the Ottawa Mood Scales items positively and significantly correlated with scores on the negative PANAS subscale, which supports the validity of the Ottawa Mood Scales in measuring the negative effect. The Cronbach's alpha was .793 for the four-item model of the Ottawa Mood Scales indicating acceptable reliability in this Malaysian young adult sample. It was concluded that the Ottawa Mood Scales could have utility in assessing mood disorder symptoms in young adults.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available