Two measures were derived from the ratings on the visual analogue scale: an affective lability score derived by computing the successive-difference mean square, which measured the average change in consecutive ratings over the period of study, and an affective intensity score derived by computing mean ratings over the period of study, measured in a positive direction. The results indicated that all Affective Lability Scale subscale scores were not significantly associated with the derived measure of affective lability (with Pearson’s correlations ranging from –0.16 to 0.07). However, the Affective Lability Scale subscale scores for depression (r=–0.56, p<0.05), elation (r=–0.62, p<0.01), anxiety/depression (r=–0.68, p<0.01), and depression/elation (r=–0.71, p<0.001) were all significantly associated with the derived measure of affective intensity. Moreover, the associations of Affective Lability Scale subscales with affective intensity were significantly stronger than the correlations with our measure of affective lability for elation (z=–2.78, p<0.01), anxiety/depression (z=–3.15, p<0.01), and depression/elation (z=–3.62, p<0.001), with nonsignificant findings for the Affective Lability Scale subscale scores for depression (z=–1.82, p<0.10) and anxiety (z=–1.77, p<0.10). These findings raise questions about the validity of considering scores on the Affective Lability Scale to be measures of affective variability, and the results demonstrate a possible conflation of Affective Lability Scale scores with affective intensity. We agree with Dr. Koenigsberg et al. that measures of affective instability with established psychometric properties need to be developed and given research priority if this psychopathologic feature is to be better understood.