| dc.description.abstract | Objective: The present study introduces the concept of integration types - prototypical modes of experiencing and expressing specific affects - as a subdimension to the affect consciousness construct to account for differences in how problems with affect integration are manifested. We propose that distinguishing between two integration types, i.e. being driven by and lacking access to discrete affects, will yield a more nuanced understanding of affective functioning and its relation to relevant psychological processes. In this study we investigate the inter-relations between integration types across various affects and interpersonal dysfunction. More specifically, the aim of this study is to: 1) test the validity of integration type scales across discrete affects as operationalized in the affect consciousness model, and 2) examine the associations between integration types and specific types of interpersonal problems. Method: This study used archival data from a non-clinical sample (N=157) who completed a battery of tests including the Affect Integration Inventory (AII 2.0) and the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems - Circumplex Version (IIP-64). To examine the internal structure aspect of construct validity for the integration types across affects, confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were performed by Structural Equation Modelling (SEM). First, integration type scales for discrete affects were analysed separately. Then, the overall structure of integration type scales was analysed by testing and comparing four theoretically plausible, competing models using common indicators of model fit. External criterion validity was examined through systematic tests of patterns of hypothesized associations between integration types and specific types of interpersonal problems. Pearson’s r correlations were computed, along with z-tests of the statistical significance of differences in correlation magnitudes, and goodness of fit with optimal cosine curve functions peaking in separate and expected octants of interpersonal space based on the circumplex structural summary model. Results: The results supported the validity and reliability of the integration type subscales. CFAs of the different scales indicated acceptable fit. For the competing models, the model with specified integration types outperformed other models of affect integration and had acceptable overall model fit after some modification. External criterion validity was supported by the demonstration of theoretically predicted and consistent patterns of convergent and discriminant associations between integration type scores and specific kinds of interpersonal problems. Specifically, distinct sinusoidal patterns of correlations were found for integration types for the various affects examined. All correlation patterns had good fit (GoF ≥ .91), with significant differences in magnitude between peak and low point correlations. Conclusion: Our findings support the validity and reliability of the integration types construct, with satisfactory and theoretically sound internal structure and associations with external criteria. Distinct patterns of associations with interpersonal problems for the two integration types suggest that integration types enable researchers to uncover more differentiated associations with other psychological phenomena. The present study provides a preliminary validation of integration types as valid and useful constructs that elaborate and increase the explanatory value of the affect consciousness framework. | nob |