A preview of this full-text is provided by American Psychological Association.
Content available from Journal of Individual Differences
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
L.Köötset al.: Happiness and SadnessJournal of IndividualDifferences2012; Vol. 33(1):43–53© 2012HogrefePublishing
Original Article
Relationship Between Linguistic
Antonyms in Momentary
and Retrospective Ratings
of Happiness and Sadness
Liisi Kööts, Anu Realo, and Jüri Allik
University of Tartu, Department of Psychology, Tartu, Estonia
Abstract. Momentary ratings of affective states with a pair of strict antonyms (“happy” vs. “sad”) were studied with an experience-
sampling method in a group of 110 participants during 14 consecutive days at 7 randomly determined occasions per day. Before and
after the experimental session participants also retrospectively rated how happy or sad they had been during the previous 2 weeks.
Multilevel analysis showed that, at the level of single measurement trials, the momentary ratings of happiness and sadness were
moderately negatively correlated (r= –.32, p< .001). A between-subject correlation of the two antonyms, however, was in a positive
direction (r= .13, p= .123). Participants experienced mixed feelings during a considerable number of measurement trials, whereas the
tendency to feel mixed emotions was predicted by all Big Five personality traits except Agreeableness. A configural frequency analysis
(CFA) demonstrated that, although there was no strict bipolarity between momentary ratings of happiness and sadness, they were
nevertheless used in an exclusive manner in many occasions.
Keywords: happiness, sadness, mixed emotions, personality
Native speakers have strong intuitions about which pairs of
words are good examples of antonyms. Probably all Eng-
lish speakers would agree, for example, that happy is the
opposite of sad, very much like cold is the opposite of hot
(Cruse, 1986). Accordingly, “when you are happy, you are
not sad and when you are sad, you are not happy” (Russell
& Carroll, 1999, p. 25). It was therefore a surprising dis-
covery that individuals tend to characterize their momen-
tary or recent affective experience in two relatively inde-
pendent ways: A person’s degree of happiness does not pre-
dict their degree of sadness, even if both judgments are
made practically at the same time (Diener & Emmons,
1985; Watson & Tellegen, 1985). Very often, retrospective
or momentary measures of affect demonstrate only a weak
negative correlation between positive and negative emo-
tions (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). In Estonian, for
example, linguistic antonyms such as happy (rõõmus) and
sad (kurb) are not true opposites when they are used retro-
spectively to rate recent emotional experience (Allik &
Realo, 1997). This means that people report positive and
negative feelings at the same time, and that these two af-
fective states are not polar opposites. Although paradoxi-
cal, the separability of positive and negative affect has ac-
quired remarkable popularity among researchers. For ex-
ample, a short measure of positive and negative affect –
PANAS (Watson et al., 1988) – has been cited 5,819 times
(Web of Science, May 9, 2011) since its publication 23
years ago.
As expected, such an idea, contradicting as it does lin-
guistic intuition, did not take long to bring about heated
discussion. Green, Goldman, and Salovey (1993) chal-
lenged the idea, claiming that a nonrandom measurement
error can mask bipolarity. They argued that, after adjusting
for random and systematic error in positive and negative
affect, a correlation between the two affects that may be
close to 0 becomes closer to –1, indicating that the relation-
ship between the two variables is mutually exclusive. Al-
though systematic error can attenuate the observed corre-
lation between positive and negative affect, it still does not
explain why measures of positive and negative emotions
behave in many situations as if they were relatively inde-
pendent (Rafaeli & Revelle, 2006; Schimmack, 2001; Tel-
legen, Watson, & Clark, 1999).
Another challenge to the separability of positive and
negative emotions comes from Russell (2003), who char-
acterizes a prototypical emotional episode by two basic di-
mensions: feeling good or bad and energized or lethargic.
These states – called core affect – are supposed to have an
DOI: 10.1027/1614-0001/a000061
© 2012 Hogrefe Publishing Journal of Individual Differences 2012; Vol. 33(1):43–53
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.