Coloured rating scales match numeric gauges for emotion and pain intensity

Visual analogue scales, in which people mark how strongly they feel something along a line, are among the most common tools in clinical and research settings for measuring subjective experiences such as pain and emotion. A new validation study published in BMC Psychology tested whether coloured versions of these scales, in which intensity is expressed by shifting shades rather than line positions, can stand in for the standard format. The findings suggest they can, and that coloured scales may even be easier to use, because participants responded faster with them.

The research team, led by Sara Bertagnoli and colleagues, recruited 128 healthy adults with a mean age of 21.64 years (standard deviation 3.36), including 62 females and 66 males. Participants completed two experiments comparing a conventional visual analogue scale with a coloured counterpart. In the first experiment, they rated the valence of emotions displayed in human faces using a coloured scale in which yellow represented happiness and blue grey represented sadness. In the second, they rated the intensity of imaginary pain typically associated with certain everyday life situations, this time using a red-shaded coloured scale alongside the standard version.

The researchers assessed how well the two formats agreed using several complementary approaches. Convergent and concurrent validity were examined through correlation analyses, which showed high correlations between ratings made on the coloured scales and the standard visual analogue scales. Construct validity was tested with repeated-measures analyses, and the two scale types showed comparable sensitivity to differences in the stimuli being rated. In other words, the coloured scales captured the same gradations of emotional valence and imagined pain intensity as the traditional line-based format.

The most striking difference between the formats emerged in response times. Participants answered faster when using the coloured scales than when using the visual analogue scales. The authors interpret this as evidence of a reduced cognitive load: translating a feeling into a colour shade appears to demand less effortful processing than mapping it onto a position along a line. This processing advantage matters because visual analogue scales are known to pose difficulties for certain groups, and coloured versions have previously been proposed specifically for children and for people with cognitive deficits.

Until now, the authors note, data on how comparable the two types of measures actually are has been meagre. The present study fills that gap by directly recording perceived intensity of both emotions and pain in the same healthy adult sample and comparing the two formats head to head. The results support the coloured scales as valid alternatives, with the faster responses suggesting they may be particularly indicated for patients with cognitive deficits, who often struggle with the demands of standard rating instruments.

The study has clear boundaries. It was conducted in healthy young adults rather than clinical populations, so the conclusion that coloured scales suit people with cognitive deficits remains a reasoned implication of the reduced cognitive load rather than a demonstrated clinical benefit. The emotions tested were conveyed through photographs of faces, and the pain ratings concerned imagined intensity in everyday situations rather than firsthand pain experience. Both experiments used within-participant comparisons, which strengthens the validity conclusions but leaves open how the scales perform across different age groups, cultures, and patient populations.

Nevertheless, the validation offers practical value for researchers and clinicians who need simple, low-burden measures of subjective states. A coloured scale that correlates highly with the standard format while being quicker to complete could reduce measurement friction in settings where long or demanding questionnaires are problematic. As the authors summarize, the high correlations and comparable sensitivity between the coloured and standard scales, combined with faster responding, position colour-based rating as a promising and accessible alternative for quantifying feelings that resist direct observation.

Subject of Research: Validation of coloured visual analogue scales against standard scales for measuring emotion and pain intensity

Article Title: Using colours to assess the intensity of emotions and pain: a validation of two coloured visual analogue scales

Article References: Bertagnoli, S., D’Asaro, F. A., Saccoman, E., Biroli, L. D., Aglioti, S. M., & Moro, V. (2026). Using colours to assess the intensity of emotions and pain: a validation of two coloured visual analogue scales. BMC Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-026-05862-y

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s40359-026-05862-y

Keywords: visual analogue scales, colour analogue scales, pain measurement, emotion rating, psychological assessment, validity, cognitive load, response times, BMC Psychology, self-report scales, colours, assess