The Profile of Mood States (POMS) is the most widely used self-report instrument for the measurement of affect or mood in clinical and nonclinical populations. This paper reports on the translation and testing of a Korean version of the POMS. The translation involved three steps: translation, checking agreement, and panel discussions to arrive at consensus. Then, the Korean version of the POMS was tested with a sample of 47 healthy Koreans who lived in the U.S.: they completed the instrument in the morning, at the beginning of work and in the evening, at the end of work. Internal consistencies for the total scale and subscales were high(alphas= .93 and .94). Face and content validity and the cultural relevance of the Korean version of the POMS were tested through review by five bilingual Korean nursing scholars who were familiar with Korean version of the POMS was then compared with Haeok Fatigue Behavior Check-list and demonstrating significant concurrent validity (r= .87, p<.001). Construct validity was established by demonstrating significant differences between the scores on the scores on the Fatigue and Vigor subscales (p< .001) at the beginning work and at the end of work.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  

• The Effect of Colour on the Anchoring Heuristic in Consumer Decision Making
  
  Journal of European Psychology Students.2014; 5(3): 19.     CrossRef
• Emotional Reaction of Psychiatric Nurses and Resident Physicians toward Suicidal Behavior in Psychiatric Inpatients
  In-Woo Jung, Soo Yang
  Journal of Korean Academy of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing.2011; 20(4): 365.     CrossRef
• Spirituality, Depression, Living Alone, and Perceived Health Among Korean Older Adults in the Community
  Kwang Soo You, Hae-Ok Lee, Joyce J. Fitzpatrick, Susie Kim, Eiji Marui, Jung Su Lee, Paul Cook
  Archives of Psychiatric Nursing.2009; 23(4): 309.     CrossRef
• Verification of the profile of mood states‐brief: Cross‐cultural analysis
  Eun Ja Yeun, Kay KongBum Shin‐Park
  Journal of Clinical Psychology.2006; 62(9): 1173.     CrossRef