.

Iournnl of Affectire Disorders, 24 ( 1992) 2 17-226 217

8 1992 Elscvier Ssiexe Publishers B.V. All rights reserved 01650327/92/$05.00

JAD 00881

ood states and personality traits

Dragan M. Svrakic, Thomas R. Przybeck and C. Robert Cloninger

Washington Utkersity Sci~onl oj Medicine, Depurtment qf Psyckiatrb: St. katris. MO 63110, USA
(Received I October 1991)
(Revisiun receiced 22 November 1991)
(Accepted 10 December 1991)

In this article we analyze the relationship between personality traits assessed by the Tridimensional
Personality Qtiestionnaire, and six mood states assessed by the Profile of Mood States-bipolar form. Our
data suggest that large portions of personality and/or behavior, e.g., higher order dimensions of Novelty
Sesking and Reward Dependence, can be relatively indeper,Ce;lt from current mood. In contrast, the
Harm Avoidance dimension covaries with mood and anxiety. Also, we analyze the psychometric
propertics of the Profile of Mood States-bipolar form, and discuss some practical aspects of our findings.

Kq ws4.s: Personality trait; Mood state

- --_

ood states and personality traits
It has been hypothesized for centuries that
emotions influence personalitv. Recent psycho-
metric studies of temperament and adult person-
ality structure have improved our understanding
of both the nature and the degree of this influ-
cnce. Psychometric studies of personality suggest
that individual differences vary along three to five
higher order, heritable and stable dimensions.
These dimensions can be associated systemati-
cally with basic emotional dispositions. For exam-
ple, Novelty Seeking (NS), Harm Avoidance (I-IA),
Address for correspondence: D.M. Svrakic, Washington
University School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry,
4940 Audubon Ave, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
and Reward Dependence (RD), described by
Cloninger (1987% are postulated to reflect dispo-
sitions to anger, fear, ard attachment, respec-
tively.
Studies of children (e.g., Maziade et al., 1986)
show that a small number of emotions account
far individual differences until the age of 8 years.
Likewise, DSM-IIIR relates only three deviant
personality types in children to adult personality
disorders (P,Ds): Conduct Disorder (aggressive-
ness), Avoidact Disorder (fearfulness), and Iden-
tity Disorder (confusion about attachment and
self-concepts). Widiger et al. (19871)and Tyler et
al. (1990) showed that adult PDs also represent
the behavioral expression of a small number of
deviant emotional types - aloof, fearful, and
i.mpulsive.
218
Accordingly, many authors explain personality
as reflecting basic emotional dispositions. The
most prominent concepts are Plutchik’s (1980)
psychoevolutionary theory, Tomkins’ affect the-
ory (Tomkins and McCarter, 1964), Zkman’s
(1984) neuro-cultural theory, Izard’s (1977) differ-
ential emotions theory, Gray’s (1985) model of
personality, Malatesta and Wilson’s (1988) model
of emotion traits, Tellegen’s (1985) model of per-
sonality and mood, and Cloninger’s (1987) unified
biosocial model of personality. Each of the mod-
els postulates, to some degree, a stable and signif-
icant functional association between biogenetic
dispositions to specific moods and observable
personality traits. The close correspondence be-
tween mood and personality is summarized in
Table 1.
Extensive evaluation of personality is rarely
seen in studies dealing with emotionality and
personality. Instead, non-specific, context-depen-
dent, and/or single behavior acts (e.g., reliance
on others), or phenomena that normally accom-
pany depression (e.g., low self-esteem) have been
studied (Lorr and Wunderlich, 1988; Pilowsky
and Katsikitis, 1983). Some authors (Hirschfeld et
al., 1983) combine scales from various instru-
ments (e.g., the Eysenck Personality Inventory,
the Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey,
the Interpersonal Dependency Inventory, etc.),
whereas others (Charney et al., 1981) use criteria
for PDs to assess personality in depression.
Personality traits and mood traits have been
own to correlate with each other, but the pat-
tern of this correlation is sometimes confusing.
For example, Neuroticism (N), or enduring emo-
TABLE 1
CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN PERSONALITY AND EMOTIONALITY
Personality Characteristic emotional traits
dimension
High scorer
Novelty seeking quick-tempered; excitable; curious:
enthusiastic; exuberant: easily bored.
Reward dependence loving; sensitive; warm; dedicated;
depressed if separated.
Harm avoidance fearful; doubtful; timid; dismayed;
disgusted; fatigable.
tional instability, correlates with ensuring anxiety
and depression (0.59 and 0.5 1, respectively) in the
‘trait’ version of the Multiple Affective Adjective
Checklist (MAACL), but not (0.05 and 0.05) with
the same moods described in the ‘state’ version of
the MAACL. Extraversion (E) is related weakly
(from -0.07 to -0.23) to both the ‘state’ and the
‘trait’ version of the MAACL (Eysenck and
Eysenck, 1968). One would expect E to correlate
highly negatively with enduring negative moods in
the ‘trait’ version of the MAACL because, as
defined, E .measures stable personality traits re-
flecting sociability.
The relationship of personality to affective dis-
orders (ADS) has not been understood satisfacto-
rily. Diverse explications of this relationship have
been advocated (Wetzel et al., 1980; Akiskal et
al., 1983; Phillips et al., 1990). In general, ADS
tend to change scores on personality tests (Akiskal
et al., 1983). The Millon Clinical Multiaxial In-
ventory (the MCMI), for example, is state depen-
dent, as 10 of 11 MCMI scales change in depres-
sion (Joffe and Regan, 1988). Lastly, some studies
(e.g., Pilowsky, 1979) suggest that endogenous
depressions elevate scores on the E, F, H, and Q3
16PF scales describing submissive-dominant,
gloomy-enthusiastic, timid-adventurous, and poor
self-sentiment-high self-sentiment personality
traits in the Sixteen Personality Factor Question-
naire (the 16PF) (Catell et al., 1985).
The Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI,
Eysenck and Eysenck, 29681 1 ~1soften been used
in studies of depression. Sometimes, depression
affects both Neuroticism and Extraversion: N
scores are higher and E scores are lower than
Low scorer
slow-tempered; stoical; uninquiring:
inexuberant: unenthusiastic; tolerant.
unfriendly; insensitive; cool;
irresolute: indifferent if alone.
relaxed; self-assured; boltl;
daring; du.tntless; vigorous.

those of students (Boyce et al., 1989). Sometimes,
mood and anxiety change N scores solely
(Liebowitz et al., 1979; see also Davidson et al.,
1985, for review). Sometimes, after symptomatic
recovery, both N and E tend to normzlize (Cop-
pen and Metcalfe, 1965). Yet, Hirschfeld et al.
(1983) found that, after recovery, both N and E
tend to normalize in females, but only N im-
proves in males. In contrast, Davidson et al. (1985)
showed that N is unlikely to change with symp-
tom reduction at all. Lastly, Neuroticism scores
may not reflect personality features in depressed
persons, as 19 of the 24 N items appear in the
Hamilton Depression Scale, and 12 appear in the
Hamilton Anxiety Scale (Davidson et al., 1983, p.
181).
Clearly, there is a need for studies further
elucidating the relationship between mood and
personality, both in psychopathology and in nor-
mal states. In this article we analyze the relation-
ship of bipolar personality dimensions assessed by
the Tridimensional Personality Questionnaire (the
TPQ), and bipolar mood states assessed by the
Profile of Mood States-bipolar form (the POMS-
bi) (Lorr and McNair, 1984/ 1988).
ethods
Subjects
As a part of a study of the effects of personal-
ity and mood on learning, 86 college students, 32
males and 54 females, completed the TPQ and
the POMS-bi. The mean age was 23.0 years (SD
5.9, range 16-44). We collected basic demo-
graphic information and interviewed each subject
about family and personal psychiatric history,
presence or absence of mental and/or physical
disorders. No subjects reported any diagnosed or
treated mental disorder or any significant physi-
cal disorder.
The subjects were instructed to describe their
moods during the week prior to testing rather
than at the moment of testing. This was intended
td depict mood states that are more stable than
brief emotional reactions tapped accidentally at
the moment of testing. In other words, in order to
render comparisons of personality traits and mood
states more meaningful, we focused on mood
states that are somewhere in between mood traits
219
TABLE 2
TPQ SCALES AND SUBSCALES
Nor-ehyseeking (NS)
%I: exploratory excitability vs. stoic rigidity (9 items)
NS2: impulsiveness vs. reflection (8 items)
NS3: extravagance vs. reserve (7 items)
NS4: disorderliness vs. regimentation (10 items)
NS = NSI + NS2 + NS3 + NS4 (34 items)
Harm avoidance {HA)
HAl: anticipatoq- worry vs. uninhibited optimism (10 items)
HA2: fear of uncertainty vs. confidence (7 items)
HA3: shyness with strangers vs. gregariousness (7 items)
HA4: fatigability and asthenia vs. vigor (10 items)
HA = HA1 + HA2 + HA3 + HAI (34 items)
Reward dependence (.PD)
KDl: sentimentality vs. insensitiveness (5 items)
RD2: persistence vs. irresoluteness (9 items)
RD3: attachment vs. detachment (11 items)
RD4: dependence vs. independence (5 items)
RD = RDl + RD2 + RD3 + RD4 (30 items)
and brief reactions to everyday events, but much
closer to the latter.
Instrurrients
The TPQ assesses personality dimensions of
NS, HA, and RD, defined by Cloninger (1987).
The TPQ is a loo-item, paper-and-pencil,
true/false self-report questionnaire that takes
about 15 min to complete.
HA, RD, and NS are higher order dimensions,
subdivided into four subscales in the TPQ (Table
2). Persons high in NS tend to be curious, impul-
sive, quick-tempered, and disorderly; those low in
NS are reflective, stoical, slow-tempered; and or-
derly. Persons high in RD are sentimental, so-
cially sensitive, persistent, tender-hearted and
dedicated; those low in RD are insensitive, prac-
tica!, irresolute, tough-minded, and detached.
Persons high in HA are apprehensive, shy, pes-
simistic, and fatigable; those low in HA tend to
be optimistic, carefree, outgoing, and energetic.
Normative values for the TPQ were estab-
lished in a national area probability sample of
1019 respondents who completed the TPQ as a
part of the 1987 General Social Survey (Cloninger
et al., 1991; ‘+rakic et al., 1991). The internal
consistency of the scales was acceptable. The TABLF 3
test-retest reliability for 6 months was 0.76 for THE POMS-bi ” AND THE TPQ ’ REFERENCE MEANS
NS, 0.79 for HA, and 0.70 for RD. (SD in parentheses) COMPARED TO 86 COLLEGE STU-
DENTS
The POMS-bi is a 72-item, self-report ques-
tionnaire that takes about lo-15 min to com- Students Norms
plete. Following a series of experiments to assess
Noreltyswkitrg 17.3 (5.2) * 13.0 (5.0)
all of the factor analytically established mood 5.7 (1.8) * 4.1 (I.91
NSl
states and feelings, the POMS-bi was designed to NS2 3.0 (1.9) ** 2.3 (1.8)
measure six bipolar mood states. Each is defined NS3 3.8 (1.7) ** 3.1 (1.7)
by a scale composed of 12 adjectives. The adjec- NS4 4.8 (2.0) * 3.4 (1.9)
tives are rated on a 4-point scale, ranging from Hwttl al widiltw 12.4 (6.5) 12.0 (5.9)
‘much unlike this’ to ‘much like this’. The POMS- HA1 3.6 (2.6) * * 2.5 (2.0)
bi mood scales are: Composed-Anxious (untrou- HA2 3.4 (2.0) * 4.3 (1.8)
bled, composed, relaxed, serene vs. tense, uneasy, HA3 3>0 (2.0) 2.6 (2.0)
HA4 2.5 (2.3) 2.5 (2.3)
anxious, shaky); Agreeable-Hostile (friendly,
kindly, sympathetic, vs. grouchy, angry); Elated- Rc~wti clcpmiwce 19.7 (4.0) 18.9 (4.0)
Depressed (cheerful, lighthearted vs. dejected, RDl 4.0 ( 1.O) 4.0 ( 1.O)
RD2 5.6 (2.2) 5.5 (1.9)
lonely); Confident-Unsure (confident, bold vs.
RD3 7.3 (2.5) 6.7 (2.3)
unsure, timid); Energetic-Tired (alert, vigorous RD4 2.8 (1.4) 2.6 (1.3)
vs. tired, exhausted); Clearheaded-Confused (at-
Pl 21.7 (7.9) 22.6 (7.8)
tentive, efficient, business-like vs. confused,
P2 25.7 (6.7) 27.6 (6.5)
mixed-up, dazed) (Lorr and McNair, 1984/ 198s). P3 22.7 (7.9) 23.2 (7.4)
The POMS-bi has been tested in psychiatric P4 20.5 (7.1) 21.9 (7.1)
outpatients, normal adults, and high-school stu- P5 21 .H (7.9) 20. I (8.0)
dents. The psychometric properties of the Ph 24.3 (8.0) 24.1 (7.1)
POMS-bi and studies supporting its construct va- ” For 432 normal college students.
lidity are presented in the POMS-bi Manual (Lorr t’ For 1019 subjects representative of the US population.
and McNair, 1584/ 1988). * P < 0.001; b P < 0.01. NSl -RD4, see Table 2.
PI, composed vs. anxious; P2, agreeable vs. hostile; P3, elated
vs. depressed; P4. confident vs. unsure; P5, energetic vs. tired;
Amlyws
PO. clearheaded vs. confused.
After analyzing the correlations of the POMS-
bi and the TPQ scores, we performed multiple
regression analyses of the POMS-bi and the TPQ pessimism) and lower on HA2 (fear of uncer-
scales, as well as principal components analyses, tainty) than norms.
iterated principal factor analyses, and maximum Table 4 presents the correlation analysis of the
likelihood factor analyses of the TPQ and the TPQ personality scales and the POMS-bi mood
POMS-bi scores using Varimax and Promax rota- scales.
tion. The consistency of the pattern of correlations
is striking. On the scale level, HA is related
esults robustly to al! POMS-bi scales: Agreeable-Hostile
( - 0.39), Composed-Anxious ( - 0.46), Clear-
The mean scores for the POMS-bi and the headed-confused ( - 0.48), Elated-Depressed
TPQ were quite similar to normative values (Lorr ( - 0.5 l), Energetic-Tired ( - 0.57) and Confident-
and McNair, 1984/1988, p. 5; Svrakic et al., 1991; Unsure ( -0.58). NS is related to the Clear-
Cloninger et al., 1951) (Table 3). The higher NS headed-confused ( - 0.28) scale. RD is related to
scores in the college group reflect the lower age the Composed-Anxious ( - 0.34) and Confident-
of the sample. This is a postulated feature of the Unsure ( - 0.28) scales.
model (Cloninger, 1987). The summer school col- On the subscale level, most HA subscales are
lege group scores are higher on HA1 (worry and highly correlated with most POMS-bi mood scales.
221
HAI, HA3, and HA4 (anticipatory worry, shyness TABLE 5
with strangers, fatigability) are related highly to FACTOR STRUCTURE OF THE POMS-bi SCALES HALF
all POMS-bi mood scales, and HA2 (fear of un- SCORE‘, a
certainty) is related to three of them, i.e., Ener-
Var;max rotation Promax rotation
getic-Tired ( - 0.41), Confident-Unsure ( - 0.3 1)
and Elated-Depressed (-0.26). On the other Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 1 Factor 2
hand, one NS subscale (NS3, extravagance) is H! - 0.41 0.72 -0.21 0.68
related to the Composed-Anxious (- 0.29), H2 0.88 - 0.25 0.93 0.04
Elated-Depressed (- 0.33), Clearheaded-Con- H3 - 0.07 0.81 0.21 0.91
H4 0.65 -0.41 0.58 - 0.42
fused (- 0.33), and Agreeable-Hostile ( - 0.41)
H5 - 0.35 0.82 - 6-G 0.83
POMS-bi scales. Also, two RD subscales, i.e., 0.79 0.78 -0.17
H6 - 0.40
sentimentality (RDl) and attachment (RD3), are H7 - 0.35 - 0.63 -0.17 0.60
related to the POMS-bi sca!es RD1 and RD3 HX 0.90 -- 0.21 0.98 0.10
with Composed-Anxious ( - - 0.26), and RDI also H9 - 0.35 0.71 -0.14 0.69
with Confident-Unsure ( - 0.35) and Clear- HI0 0.71 - 0.30 0.73 - 0.07
headed-confused ( - 0.34). Hll - 0.46 0.62 - 0.3 1 0.54
To understand more clearly the relationship H12 0.8 1 - 0.35 0.82 -0.10
between the TPQ and the POMS-bi scales, we interfactor correlation
regressed each of the TPQ scales and subscales - 0.58
on the six POMS-bi scales. As expected, the
” Loadings of 0.30 and above are underlined.
POMS-bi scales explained a large proportion Hl, composed; 1-12,anxious; H3, agreeable; H4, hostile; H5,
(40%) of the variance in HA, but much less of the elated; 116, depressed; H7, confident; H8, unsure; H9, ener-
variance in NS (16%) and RD (20%) (Table 4). getic: HlO, tired; Hll, clearheaded; H12, confused.
Similar trends are evident for the TPQ subscales.
For all regressions with 20% or more explained
variance, the amount of variance explained by all scores and the TPQ (half scores describe just one
six POMS-bi scales is negligibly larger than that pole of a bipolar scale, e.g., half scores for the
explained by the single POMS-bi scale with the Composed-Anxious scale reflect separately the
largest correlation with that particular TPQ scale composed and anxious scores). The rationale for
or subscale. This reflects the high correlations performing this analysis was to replicate Lorr and
between the POMS-bi scales and indicates that Wunderlich’s (1988) findings; yet, by analyzing
e same component of variance half scores of bipolar scales a moderate negative
in the TPQ scales. Thus, a single POMS-bi scale correlation between polar half scales emerges
is generally as informative as all six. necessarily. This artifact is certain to be a major
HA appears sensitive to all the supposedly determinant of the obtained factor structure. As
distinct mood states described in the POMS-bi. expected, opposite poles of the scales were corre-
This is meaningful for some of the scales (e.g., lated (from -0.53 to - 0.67). Also, the 12
Composed-Anxious), but debatable for others POMS-bi half scales were interrelated highly (60
(e.g., Clearheaded-Confused). Moreover, in a of 66 correlations were significant at P < 0.0001
sample of psychiatric outpatients we have ob- with Y’Sof absolute value of 0.40 or higher).
served that HA correlates with measures of de- We factor analyzed the correlation matrix of
pression in a pattern quite similar to that pre- the POMS-bi half scales and rotated the factors
sented in Table 4 (Brown et al., 1992). This led US by Varimax. Also, we rotated the factors further
to examine in more detail the structural proper- by Promax, as an oblique rotation is most appro-
ties of the POMS-bi. priate for correlated factors (Table 5).
Lorr and Wunderlich (1988) report that the The principal components analysis retained
POMS-bi mood scales reflect higher order di- two factors. There was a third factor with an
mensions of positive ard negative affect. We ana- eigenvalue just below 1.0 (0.94). Varimax rotation
lyzed correlations beween the POMS-bi half yielded loadings suggesting the two factors reflect
 223

moods that are not separated clearly, as nine of TABLE 7

12 half scales loaded above 0.30 on both of the FACTOR LOADINGS QF POMS-bi SCALES AND THE
factors. Promax rotation yielded factors that were TPQ SUBSCALES (rotation by Promax) ’
not related to the dichotomy ‘positive-negative
affect’ at all. The inter-factor correlation was Factor 1. Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5
high C-0.58), suggesting that the two factors NSI
should be merged. Factor analyses of the PQMS- NS2
NS3 -0.41
bi full scales suggest that just one factor underlies NS4
the scales (see below and Table 7).
Watson and Tellegcn (1985) note that, ‘al- HA1 0.64
HA2 0.64
though the terms Negative and Positive Affect HA3 0.71
might suggest that these mood factors are oppo- HA4 - 0.30 0.46 - 0.41
sites (i.e., negatively related) they are indepen-
RDl 0.74
dent and uncorrelated dimensions’ (p. 221); thus, RD2 0.88
for the POMS-bi the high inter-factor correlation RD3 0.77
suggests that even if it were bifactorial it would RD4 0.34 0.51 0.52
not measure the dimensions of positive and nega- Pl 0.87
t’ve affect. P2 0.86
The maximum likelihood factor analysis of the P3 0.90
POMS-bi yielded four factors (Table 6). These P4 0.71
P5 0.67
factors may be unstable (especially given the small
P6 0.82
samplb size). Yet, maximum likelihood factor
analysis allows hypothesis testing for number of * Only loadings of 0.30 and above are included.
factors and we expected it to provide some fur-
ther information about the conceptual and factor
organization of the POMS-bi scales. syndrome of depression’ or ‘dysphoria’. Three
Five negative moods (anxious, tired, de- positive moods (elated, confident, energetic)
pressed, unsure, and confused) formed factor 1. loaded on factor 2; we labeled this factor ‘vigor’.
We labeled this factor ‘mood components of the The ‘composed’ and ‘agreeable’ items formed
factor 3, and the ‘hostility’ items factor 4. Appar-
ently, the POMS-bi mood scales are not de-
TABLE 6 scribed accurately by higher order dimensions of
MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD FACTOR ANALYSIS OF THE positive and negative affect. Also, the factors
PQMS-bi (rotation by Varimax) a were interrelated (from O/6 to 0.57) suggesting
that the POMS-bi scales reflect moods that do
Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 not differ orthogonally. For example, the scales
Composed - 0.34 0.82 are more likely to measure unpleasantness vs. low
Anxious 0.83 negative affect, as described by Watson and Tel-
Agreeable 0.49 - 0.44
legen (1985).
Hostile 0.48 0.74
The principal components analysis of the
Elated 0.59 0.48 - 0.38
Depressed 0.65 0.54
POMS-bi full scales and the TPQ subscales iso-
Confident - 0.36 0.64 lated five factors with eigenvalues above 1.0
Unsure 0.87 (ranging from 5.678 to 1.196). The standardized
Energetic 0.80 factor loadings following rotation by Promax are
Tired 0.56 - 0.39 summarized in Table 7. The standardized factor
Clearheaded - 0.45 0.43 0.40 loadings following rotation by Varimax were quite
Confused 0.72 11.35 similar to those presented in Table 7.
;’ Only loadings of 0.30 and above are included. The solution includes one factor for the
The highest loadings are underlined. POMS-bi scales, and four factors for the TPQ
scales and subscales. The HA items (factor 2) did
not load on factor 1 (the POMS items) because
although the PQMS-bi and the HA items are
highly related, the OMS-bi items are more highly
correlated among themselves and tend to group
together. The interfactor correlations were low,
ranging from -0.04 to 0.32; the only two corre-
lated factors (0.32) were factor 1 and factor 2, the
first reflecting moods defined by the POMS-bi,
the second reflec ng HA measured by the TPQ.
The separate loa ing of the persistence subscale
(RD2-factor S), is discussed elsewhere (Cloninger
et al.. 1991).
Discussion
The following aspects of our results deserve
emphasis. First, it appears that mood states affect
personality domai s differentially. Personality di-
mensions of NS and RD are related minimally to
the POMS-bi mood scales, implying that NS and
pendent of current mood
S-bi. This is a remarkable
relatively large portions of
lity can be unaffected by
In contrast, HA and its subscales are related
to most of the POMS-bi mood scales. Our analy-
ses suggest that the POMS-bi scales are unlikely
to measure bipolar mood dimensions, but rather
the presence of a mood state consisting of mood
components of the syndrome of depression. The
POMS-bi scales are highly intercorrelated, from
0.40 to 0.70 (Lorr and McNair, 1984/1988, p. 7).
Consequently, a ngh scorer on any of the scales
is likely to score high on the rest of the scales.
High ends of the POMS-bi scales include moods
- composed, agreeable, confident, energetic,
clearheaded - that, taken together, describe an
optimal mood state and/or the absence of de-
pression to a much greater extent than they de-
scribe the opposite pole of being depressed, i.e.,
euphoria.
Mood traits of positive and negative affect are
descriptively bipol r, but affectively unipolar. The
high ends are mar ed by adjectives describing the
presence of a cer n affect, whereas the low ends
are marked by a ctives describing the absence
of that affect (Zevon and Tellegen, 1982). The
high ends of the POMS-bi scales measure the
absence of dysphoria rather than the presence of
highly positive moods. The POMS-bi is quite un-
likely to measure bipolar mood states.
On tl-.t other hand, a low scorer on any of the
scales is likely to be a low scorer on the rest of
the scales. In other words, the six negative mood
states - depressed, anxious, hostile, unsure, tired,
and confused - tend to coexist. Thus, it seems
that the POMS-bi measures six moods that con-
stitute the syndrome of depression. Hence, the
TPQ subscales closely related to depression (i.e.,
HAI and HA4, worry and fatigability) are most
highly related to the POMS-bi scales. Also, we
calculated negative affect (based on the sum of
item scores on the POMS-bi six negative half
scales). Again, the subscales related to depression
(HA1 and HA4) were most highly related to
negative affect, i.e., mood components of depres-
sion.
According to Lorr and McNair ( 1984/ 1988, p.
3-7), some of the principal uses of the POMS-bi
are: (a) to identify and assess transient moods in
normal subjects; and (b) to compare the various
personality disorders (PDs) described in DSM-III
as to characteristic mood profile. This is some-
what confusing because the implication is that
both transient and stable moods can be measured
by the POMS-bi (most PDs manifest an enduring
deviant mood profile). Our results suggest that
the POMS-bi is not suitable for comparisons of
mood profiles of PDs.
Also, this study suggests that a single and
unipolar higherorder mood dimension underlies
the POMS-bi mood scales. This is rather differ-
ent from the psychometric properties of the
POMS-bi describsd in the Manual (Lorr and
McNair, 1984/ 1988). Because the POMS-bi has
been used widely in research, future studies on
this topic are required.
In this study the sample size is relatively small.
However, several aspects of the study tend to
increase its reliability and to bolster soundness of
the conclusions. First, the mean scores for the
POMS-bi and the TPQ, and the factor structure
of the TPQ, were quite similar to those found in
samples of collcgc students and general popula-
tion samples (Lorr and McNair, 1984/ 1988; Svra-
kit et al., 1991; Cloninger ct al., 1991). In other

words, nothing unusual characterized the way 86
students performed on the POMS-bi and the
TPQ. Next, we (Brown et al., 1992) and other
researchers (R. Joffe, personal communication)
have observed results very similar to those re-
ported here (i.e., the relative mood-independence
of NS and RD, and mood sensitivity of HA) in
samples of depressed psychiatric outpatients as
well.
Cloninger’s (19873 personaiiiy model postu-
lates a functional association between basic di-
mensions of NS, RD, and HA, and three major
brain systems for the activation, maintenance,
and inhibition of behaviors. Neuroanatomical and
biochemical networks underlying personality di-
mensions of HA, NS, and RD, and regulating
emotional and learning processes are discussed in
Cloninger (1987). The HA dimension is postu-
lated to reflect variation in the brain’s behavioral
inhibirion system, i.e., the septohippocampal sys-
tem, serotonergic projections from the raphe nu-
clei, and cholinergic projections to the frontal
neocortex ventral tegmental area and basal nu-
cleus of Meynert (Cloninger, 1987, p. 576). The
observed changes in HA reflecting changes in
mood states point to specific neuroanatomicai
areas and neurochemical processes determining
motivational aspects of observable behaviors and
hence may be useful in future studies of the
relationship between mood traits, mood states,
ADS, PDs, and personality.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported in part by Grant
MH31302 from the National Institute of Mental
Health, Grants AA07982 and AA08028 ‘rom the
National Institute of Alcoholism, and a pilot re-
search grant from the MacArthur Foundation
Mental Health Research Network I (Psychobi-
ology of Depression). Kenneth Freedland, Ph.D.:
Washington University School of Medicine, St.
Louis, and an anonymous reviewer provided many
useful comments.
ferences
Akiskal, H.S. (1983) Dysthymic disorder: psychopathology of
proposed chronic depressive subtypes. Am. J. Psychiatry
140, 1l-20.
225
Akiskal, H.S., Hirschfeld, R.M.A. and Yerevanian, B.1. (1983)
The relationship of personality to affective disorders. Arch.
Gen. Psychiatry 40, 801-810.
Brown, S.L., Svrakic, D-M., Przybeck, T.R. an i Cioninger,
CR. (1992) The relationship of personality to mood and
anxiety states: a dimensional approach (in preparation).
Charney, D.S., Nelson, C.J. and Quinlan, D.M. (1981) Person-
ality traits and disorder in depression. Am. J. Psychiatry
138, 1601-1604.
Cloninger, C.R. (1987) A systematic method for clinical de-
scription and classification of personality variants. Arch.
Gea. Psychiatry 44, 573-588.
Cloninger, C.R., Przybeck, T.R. and Svrakic, D.M. (1991) The
tridimensional personality questionnaire: G.S. normative
data. Psychol. Rep., 69, 1047-1057.
Costa, P. and McCrae, R. (1985) The NE0 Personality Inven-
tory Manual. Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.,
USA.
Ekman, P. (1984) Expression and the Nature of Emotion. In:
K. Scherer and P. Ekman, (Eds.), Approaches to Emotion.
Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 329-343.
Davidson, J., Miller, R. and Strickland, R. (1985) Neuroticism
and personality disorders in depression. J. Affect. Disord.
8, 177-182.
Eysrnck, H.J. and Eysenck, S. (1968) Manual for the Eysenck
Personality Inventory. Educational and Industrial Testing
Service, San Diego, CA.
Gray, J. (1985) Issues in the neuropsychology of anxiety. In:
H. Tuma and J. Maser (Eds.), Anxiety and Anxiety Disor-
ders. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 5-26.
Hyler, S., Lyons, M., Reider, R. et al. (1990) The factor
structure of self-report DSM III axis II symptoms and
their relationship to clinicians’ ratings. Am. J. Psychiatry
147, 75 I-757.
Izard, C. (1977) Human Emotions. Plenum Press, New York,
NY.
Joffe, R. and Regan. J. (1988) Personality and Depression. J.
Psychiatr. Res. 23, 279-286.
Lorr, M. and McNair, D. (1984/1988) Manual. Profile of
Mood States. Educational and Industriz! Testing Service,
San Diego, CA.
Lorr, M. and Wunderlich, R. (1988) Self-esteem and negative
affect. J. Clin. Psycho). 44, 36-39.
Malatesta, C.Z. and Wilson, A. (1988) Emotion/cognition
interaction in personality development: a discrete emo-
tions, functionalist analysis. Br. J. Sot. Psychol. 27, 91-l 12.
Maziade, M., Boutin, P., Cote, R. et al. (1986) Empirical
characteristics of the NYLS temperament in middle child-
hood: congruities and incongruitles with other studies.
Child Psychiatry Hum. Dev. 17, 58-52.
Plutchik, R. (1980) Emotions: A Psychoevolutionary PersPec-
tive. Harper and Row, New York, NY.
Phillips, K., Gunderson, J., Hirschfeld, R. et al. (1990) A
review of depressive personality. Am. J. Psychiatry 147,
830-837.
Pitowsky, I. (1979) Personality and depressive illness. Acta
Psychiatr. Stand. 60, 170-176.
Pitowsky, I. and Katsikitis, M. (1983) Depressive illness and
dependency. Acta Psychiatr. Stand. 68, 1l-14.
226
Svrakic. D.nl.. Przybeck, T.R. and Cloninger, C.R. (1991)
Further contribution to the conceptual validity of the
unified hiosocial model of personality: US and Yugoslav
.lata. Comp. Psychiatry 32. 195-209.
Tellegen, A. (1985) Strucrures of mood and personality and
their relevance to assessing anxiety, with an emphasis on
self-report. In: H. Tuma and J. Maser (Eds.), Anxiety and
Anxiety Disorders. Erlbaum, Hillsdale. NJ. pp. 681-706.
Tomkins. S. and McCarter, R. (1964) What and where are the
primary affects: some evidence for a theory. Percept. Mo-
tor Skills 1X. 119- lS6.
Watson, D. and Tellegen. A. (1985) Toward a consensual
structure of mood. Psychol. Bull. 98, 219-235.
Wetzel, R., Cloninger. C.R., Hong, C. and Reich, T. (1980)
Personality as a subclinical expression of the affective
disorders. Comp. Psychiatry 21, 197-205.
Widiger, T., Trull, T.. Hurt, S. et al. (1987) A multidimen-
sional scaling of the DSM III personali@ disorders. Arch.
Gen. Psychiatry 44, 557-563.
Zevon. M. and Tellegen. A. (1982) The structure of mood
change: an idiographic/Nomothetic analysis. J. Person.
Sot. Psychol. 43. Ill- 122.