152 II. BIOLOGICAL  FOuNDATIONS
frames (e.g., from momentary mood to av -
erage mood over the past year) (Watson, 
1988), as well as in diverse cultures and 
languages (e.g., Balatsky & Diener, 1993; 
Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1984). It is im -
portant to stress that despite their opposite- 
sounding labels, these dimensions are largely 
orthogonal; that is, they represent indepen -
dent biopsychosocial dimensions that are 
influenced by different external variables 
(Clark & Watson, 1988, 1991) and distinct 
internal biological systems (Clark, Watson, 
& Leeka, 1989; Watson et al., 1999).
Individuals high in N/NE report higher 
levels of NA in virtually any situation, from 
baseline conditions to highly stressful cir -
cumstances (e.g., Watson & Clark, 1984). 
Conversely, high E/PE individuals are more 
likely to report higher PA levels across a 
wide range of situations (Watson & Clark, 
1992b, 1997). Indeed, as stated earlier, the 
propensity to experience NA and PA more 
frequently and intensely are core features of 
the N/NE and E/PE dimensions, respective -
ly (Tellegen, 1985; Watson & Clark, 1984, 
1992b).
Not surprisingly, the voluminous litera -
ture on subjective well-being (SWB) also has 
established its relation to both (low) N/NE 
and (high) E/PE. Ozer and Benet-Martínez 
(2006, p. 404) provide an excellent sum -
mary of this literature, and we can do no 
better than to quote their straightforward 
conclusion in this regard: “In summary, 
SWB is strongly predicted by personality 
traits that are largely a function of tempera -
ment (i.e., extraversion and neuroticism).” 
These relations showed robust replication 
in Soto’s (2019) study. Associations with the 
related variables of family satisfaction (low 
N/NE), romantic satisfaction (high E/PE, 
low N/NE), occupational satisfaction and 
commitment (high E/PE, low N/NE), coping 
(high E/PE, low N/NE) and resilience (high 
E) were also found by Ozer and Benet-Mar -
tínez (2006) and replicated by Soto (2019), 
although the correlations were generally 
rather weak (around .20).
Although personality–  mood relations 
have been well established in various ways 
by the studies cited earlier (and many oth -
ers as well), we cannot resist the temptation 
to present additional data to document the 
point using yet another method. The data in Table 6.2 are from four longitudinal stud -
ies of college students who completed mood 
and activity forms repeatedly over varying 
lengths of time. Mood ratings were obtained 
using the 20-item Positive and Negative 
Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Clark, 
& Tellegen, 1988). Respondents rated the 
extent to which they had experienced each 
mood term (10 each for NA and PA) on a 
5-point scale ( very slightly or not at all to 
very much ). The mood ratings in Table 6.2 
represent respondents’ mood “today” (Sam -
ples 1 and 2), “over the past few days” (Sam -
ple 3), or “over the past week” (Sample 4). 
In each sample, the data for each participant 
were averaged across the entire rating period 
to yield overall mean NA and PA scores. The 
Big Three scores are from the GTS (Studies 
1 and 3) or represent factor scores calculated 
from the GTS and EPQ combined (Sample 
2) or from the GTS, EPQ, and CPI (Sample 
4). The data in Table 6.3 demonstrate that, 
regardless of the time frame over which it 
is measured or the manner in which the Big 
Three scores are derived, NA is strongly and 
TABLE 6.2.  Correlations between the Big Three 
and Aggregated Mood Ratings in Four Studies
Sample N/NE E/PE DvC
Negative affect
1.  .41 –.02  .19
2.  .41  .05  .23
3.  .60 –.26  .18
4.  .54 –.10  .29
Positive affect
1. –.14  .35 –.03
2. –.12  .44 –.09
3. –.24  .49 –.06
4.  .01  .44  .12
Note . Correlations of .30 or greater are shown in bold -
face. N/NE, neuroticism/negative emotionality; E/PE = 
extraversion/positive emotionality; DvC = disinhibition 
versus constraint. Sample 1 N = 379; mood measured 
daily for an average of 44 days (range = 30–55). Sample 2 
N = 136; mood measured daily for an average of 48 days 
(range = 21–54). Sample 3 N = 61; mood measured over 
a minimum of 42 2-day periods (range = 39–45). Sample 
4 N = 115; mood measured over an average of 13 weekly 
periods (range = 7–14). Temperament was measured using 
the GTS (Studies 1 and 3) or factor scores computed from 
the GTS, EPQ, and CPI (Studies 2 and 4).