Affect dynamics or response bias? The relationship between extreme response style and affect dynamics in a controlled experiment.

IF 3.3 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Mirka Henninger, Niels Vanhasbroeck, Francis Tuerlinckx
{"title":"Affect dynamics or response bias? The relationship between extreme response style and affect dynamics in a controlled experiment.","authors":"Mirka Henninger, Niels Vanhasbroeck, Francis Tuerlinckx","doi":"10.1037/pas0001370","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Intensive longitudinal data (ILD) have become a popular data format to capture people's momentary affect in everyday life. Besides describing persons' average affect over time, ILD are also often used to describe affect dynamics-that is, how affect changes over time-such as intraindividual variability or moment-to-moment temporal dependencies. Given that ILD studies mostly use self-report rating data, there is an increasing concern that response biases, such as extreme responding, might impact the estimates of affect dynamics. In this study, we assessed the relationship between extreme responding and affect dynamics in a controlled experiment. In a highly powered sample with <i>N</i> = 1,398 persons, we measured extreme responding using background questionnaires and repeatedly induced affect using a probabilistic reward task with <i>T</i> = 140 trials per person. Our results suggest that people with high extreme response style trait levels show substantially higher measures of affect variability. However, extreme responding is neither associated with moment-to-moment temporal dependencies nor with participants' reactivity to affective stimuli. We conclude with a discussion on the importance of evaluating measurement in ILD for psychological assessments and outline potential areas for future research to improve assessments of affect dynamics. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20770,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Assessment","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001370","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Intensive longitudinal data (ILD) have become a popular data format to capture people's momentary affect in everyday life. Besides describing persons' average affect over time, ILD are also often used to describe affect dynamics-that is, how affect changes over time-such as intraindividual variability or moment-to-moment temporal dependencies. Given that ILD studies mostly use self-report rating data, there is an increasing concern that response biases, such as extreme responding, might impact the estimates of affect dynamics. In this study, we assessed the relationship between extreme responding and affect dynamics in a controlled experiment. In a highly powered sample with N = 1,398 persons, we measured extreme responding using background questionnaires and repeatedly induced affect using a probabilistic reward task with T = 140 trials per person. Our results suggest that people with high extreme response style trait levels show substantially higher measures of affect variability. However, extreme responding is neither associated with moment-to-moment temporal dependencies nor with participants' reactivity to affective stimuli. We conclude with a discussion on the importance of evaluating measurement in ILD for psychological assessments and outline potential areas for future research to improve assessments of affect dynamics. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychological Assessment
Psychological Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
167
期刊介绍: Psychological Assessment is concerned mainly with empirical research on measurement and evaluation relevant to the broad field of clinical psychology. Submissions are welcome in the areas of assessment processes and methods. Included are - clinical judgment and the application of decision-making models - paradigms derived from basic psychological research in cognition, personality–social psychology, and biological psychology - development, validation, and application of assessment instruments, observational methods, and interviews
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信