ArticleBMC psychology2025
The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS): psychometric properties of a Mongolian version in university students.
Article in BMC psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modulating stress and sleep through a multi-compound dietary supplement: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2026Trial
- Facilitators and Barriers to Adherence and Engagement in a Lifestyle Intervention for High-Risk Older Adults: A Multi-Trial Analysis.Nutrients · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding affective states is essential in psychology and psychiatry, yet few validated scales remain for evaluating affect in Mongolia. The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) is widely used globally, but cultural and linguistic differences necessitate its validation for specific populations. This study aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the Mongolian PANAS among university students, a group navigating academic and socio-emotional challenges where emotional well-being is crucial.
methodsAfter a comprehensive translation and back-translation procedure with expert validation, we administered the 20-item Mongolian PANAS to 480 university students (mean age = 20.5, SD = 2.0; 54% female). We used exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to assess structural validity, Cronbach's alpha to evaluate internal consistency, and test-retest reliability over 14 days to determine temporal stability. Item-scale correlations were examined to test construct validity. All statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS version 26, Amos version 29, and RStudio.
resultsThe factor analysis supported a two-factor structure, consistent with the original PANAS, which explained 44.9% of the total variance and demonstrated a moderate model fit (CFI = 0.905, RMSEA = 0.066). The scale exhibited good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.788) and strong temporal stability (ICC = 0.806-0.831), confirming its reliability in measuring affect among Mongolian university students.
conclusionThe Mongolian PANAS is a psychometrically sound tool for assessing affective states in university students, which supports its use in research and educational settings. However, additional refinement may be needed to enhance its cultural sensitivity and applicability. Future research should explore its use in clinical populations and longitudinal studies to assess its predictive validity over time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.