{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013063357282821686, 'fraction_numerical': 0.001959503592423253, 'mean_word_length': 5.227642276422764, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A test of the empirical network surrounding affective instability and the degree to which it is independent from neuroticism.

Affective instability (AI) is as a central component of a number of psychiatric disorders, but it has received relatively little empirical attention as an individual construct. The goal of the current study was to study AI in the context of a broad empirical network of relevant constructs and compare its pattern of relations with those generated by trait neuroticism, both of which were assessed using both self- and informant reports. In a sample of 343 college students, the present study examined the correlations generated by an AI factor (derived from a factor analysis of relevant scales) in comparison to neuroticism in relation to personality and etiological and outcome variables. An exploratory factor analysis revealed a one-factor structure of AI related to the experience of intense and changeable negative affect and subsequent physical and behavioral consequences. The correlations generated by self- and informant reports of AI with these external criteria were almost perfectly correlated with the correlations demonstrated by self- and informant reports of neuroticism. Self- and informant reports of AI generated a pattern of results consistent with its role in a number of psychological disorders that are associated with substantial impairment. The current data suggest that AI might be best conceived of as largely overlapping with neuroticism rather than as a distinct construct.