A Comparison of Younger and Older Adults' Self-Assessment Manikin Ratings of Affective Pictures

ABSTRACT Self-Assessment Manikin (SAM) ratings were used to examine whether groups of 21 younger (M age = 20.02 years, SD = 2.28) and 21 older (M age = 66.26 years, SD = 5.64) adults had similar affective experiences to pictures from the International Affective Picture System (Lang, Bradley, & Cuthbert, 1997). The psychometrics of the SAM valence and arousal scales were also compared across age groups. Internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha) was similar for younger and older adults, where both groups made less consistent valence ratings than arousal ratings. Both groups differed from the norms for valence for pleasant pictures, but were no more different from each other than they were from the norms. Age group differences were most evident in the pleasant region of the bivariate valence by arousal affective space, where younger adults found pleasant-aroused pictures to be more pleasant and arousing than older adults did. We suggest that this age group difference could be explained by greater affect intensity and surgency for the younger group and greater emotional control and leveling of positive affect for the older group.

[1]  W. Davis,et al.  Properties of human affect induced by static color slides (IAPS): dimensional, categorical and electromyographic analysis , 1995, Biological Psychology.

[2]  C. Reynolds,et al.  Age-related differences and change in positive and negative affect over 23 years. , 2001, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[3]  B. Detenber,et al.  A Bio‐Informational Theory of Emotion: Motion and Image Size Effects on Viewers , 1996 .

[4]  L. Carstensen,et al.  Emotion and aging: experience, expression, and control. , 1997, Psychology and aging.

[5]  Ed Diener,et al.  Age and sex effects for emotional intensity. , 1985 .

[6]  P. Lang.  Behavioral treatment and bio-behavioral assessment: computer applications , 1980 .

[7]  M. Lawton,et al.  Dimensions of affective experience in three age groups. , 1992, Psychology and aging.

[8]  M. Bradley,et al.  Picture media and emotion: effects of a sustained affective context. , 1996, Psychophysiology.

[9]  Peter J. Lang,et al.  Eliciting Affect Using the International Affective Picture System: Trajectories through Evaluative Space , 1998 .

[10]  J. Birren,et al.  Aging and speed of behavior: possible consequences for psychological functioning. , 1995, Annual review of psychology.

[11]  J. M. Kittross.  The measurement of meaning , 1959 .

[12]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[13]  M. Bradley,et al.  Measuring emotion: the Self-Assessment Manikin and the Semantic Differential. , 1994, Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry.

[14]  J. Russell,et al.  The Basic Emotional Impact of Environments , 1974, Perceptual and motor skills.

[15]  P. Lang.  International Affective Picture System (IAPS) : Technical Manual and Affective Ratings , 1995 .

[16]  Michael J. Stones,et al.  Age Differences in Mood: Structure, Mean Level, and Diurnal Variation , 1994, Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement.

[17]  M. Lawton,et al.  Affect and age: cross-sectional comparisons of Structure and prevalence. , 1993, Psychology and aging.

[18]  L. Cronbach,et al.  Construct validity in psychological tests. , 1955, Psychological bulletin.

[19]  L. Carstensen,et al.  Emotional experience in everyday life across the adult life span. , 2000, Journal of personality and social psychology.