A population-based investigation of participation rate and self-selection bias in momentary data capture and survey studies.

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Current Psychology Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-06 DOI:10.1007/s12144-023-04426-2
Arthur A Stone, Stefan Schneider, Joshua M Smyth, Doerte U Junghaenel, Mick P Couper, Cheng Wen, Marilyn Mendez, Sarah Velasco, Sarah Goldstein
{"title":"A population-based investigation of participation rate and self-selection bias in momentary data capture and survey studies.","authors":"Arthur A Stone, Stefan Schneider, Joshua M Smyth, Doerte U Junghaenel, Mick P Couper, Cheng Wen, Marilyn Mendez, Sarah Velasco, Sarah Goldstein","doi":"10.1007/s12144-023-04426-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Participant selection bias is of concern to researchers conducting surveys of all types. For momentary data capture studies, such as Ecological Momentary Assessment, the level of burden associated with these techniques and the possibility of low uptake rates makes the concerns especially salient. This study invited 3,000 individuals to participate in a study of health and mood and recorded the uptake rates at various points in the process. Respondents expressing interest in participating in general were randomized into a one-time survey, a low-burden momentary study, or a high-burden momentary study. Overall, 85.9% of the sample did not respond to the study invitation (including confirming non-interest); 6.9% of the sample expressed interest in the study by completing a brief survey; 2.1% agreed to participate in the study when the protocol specifics were described (none of the study protocols were actually run). Whites were more likely to complete the survey. Of those completing the survey, individuals who reported higher income, a more \"open\" personality, better typing skills, better computer skills, who viewed the research topic as important, and who expressed interest in research on daily feelings more likely consented to being enrolled in the experiment. The number of prior surveys taken had an inverted-U shaped association with participation in this study. Finally, all individuals randomized to the one-time survey group agreed to participate compared to two-thirds of individuals in the momentary groups. These results suggest that participant selection bias may affect both one-time survey and momentary data capture studies, with the caveat that the degree of such bias will be related to a study's hypotheses.</p>","PeriodicalId":48075,"journal":{"name":"Current Psychology","volume":"106 1","pages":"2074-2090"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12456455/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04426-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Participant selection bias is of concern to researchers conducting surveys of all types. For momentary data capture studies, such as Ecological Momentary Assessment, the level of burden associated with these techniques and the possibility of low uptake rates makes the concerns especially salient. This study invited 3,000 individuals to participate in a study of health and mood and recorded the uptake rates at various points in the process. Respondents expressing interest in participating in general were randomized into a one-time survey, a low-burden momentary study, or a high-burden momentary study. Overall, 85.9% of the sample did not respond to the study invitation (including confirming non-interest); 6.9% of the sample expressed interest in the study by completing a brief survey; 2.1% agreed to participate in the study when the protocol specifics were described (none of the study protocols were actually run). Whites were more likely to complete the survey. Of those completing the survey, individuals who reported higher income, a more "open" personality, better typing skills, better computer skills, who viewed the research topic as important, and who expressed interest in research on daily feelings more likely consented to being enrolled in the experiment. The number of prior surveys taken had an inverted-U shaped association with participation in this study. Finally, all individuals randomized to the one-time survey group agreed to participate compared to two-thirds of individuals in the momentary groups. These results suggest that participant selection bias may affect both one-time survey and momentary data capture studies, with the caveat that the degree of such bias will be related to a study's hypotheses.

基于人群的瞬时数据采集和调查研究参与率和自我选择偏差调查。
参与者选择偏差是研究人员在进行各种类型的调查时所关注的问题。对于瞬时数据采集研究,例如生态瞬时评估,与这些技术有关的负担水平和低吸收率的可能性使关注特别突出。这项研究邀请了3000人参加了一项关于健康和情绪的研究,并记录了在这个过程中不同时刻的摄取率。表示有兴趣参与的应答者一般被随机分为一次性调查、低负担瞬时研究或高负担瞬时研究。总体而言,85.9%的样本没有回应研究邀请(包括确认不感兴趣);6.9%的样本通过完成简短调查表达了对研究的兴趣;当方案细节被描述时,2.1%的人同意参加研究(没有一项研究方案实际运行)。白人完成调查的可能性更大。在完成调查的人中,那些收入更高、性格更“开放”、打字技能更好、电脑技能更好、认为研究主题很重要、对日常感受研究感兴趣的人更有可能同意参加实验。先前调查的数量与参与本研究呈倒u形关系。最后,所有被随机分配到一次性调查小组的人都同意参加调查,而临时调查小组中有三分之二的人同意参加调查。这些结果表明,参与者选择偏差可能会影响一次性调查和瞬间数据采集研究,需要注意的是,这种偏差的程度将与研究的假设有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Current Psychology
Current Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
10.70%
发文量
1412
期刊介绍: Current Psychology is an international forum for rapid dissemination of peer-reviewed research at the cutting edge of psychology. It welcomes significant and rigorous empirical and theoretical contributions from all the major areas of psychology, including but not limited to: cognitive psychology and cognition, social, clinical, health, developmental, methodological, and personality psychology, neuropsychology, psychometrics, human factors, and educational psychology.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信