The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has updated its Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including with new information specifically addressed to individuals in the European Economic Area. As described in the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, this website utilizes cookies, including for the purpose of offering an optimal online experience and services tailored to your preferences.

Please read the entire Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. By closing this message, browsing this website, continuing the navigation, or otherwise continuing to use the APA's websites, you confirm that you understand and accept the terms of the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including the utilization of cookies.

×

OBJECTIVE: To explore the ways in which psychiatry residents conceptualize the terms “mood” and “affect,” a 14-item questionnaire was sent to residency programs in New York. METHOD: The questions consisted of possible definitions of mood and affect; all questions required a “true” or “false” response. Residents (N=99) were asked how they viewed mood and affect from a temporal perspective (i.e., sustained versus momentary) and in terms of an objective-subjective (or external-internal) dichotomy. RESULTS: There were inconsistencies in the temporal view of mood (said to be sustained by 60.6% and momentary by 50.5%) and affect (“pervasive” by 26.3% and “momentary” by 66.3%). Residents overwhelmingly defined mood as being subjective and internal and affect as being objective and external. CONCLUSIONS: If mood and affect are to be viewed from both perspectives, psychiatrists must infer the enduring internal emotional tone (mood) of a patient over an entire interview.