Response times in Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA): shedding light on the response process with a drift diffusion model.

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Current Psychology Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-27 DOI:10.1007/s12144-023-04773-0
Stefan Schneider, Raymond Hernandez, Doerte U Junghaenel, Bart Orriens, Pey-Jiuan Lee, Arthur A Stone
{"title":"Response times in Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA): shedding light on the response process with a drift diffusion model.","authors":"Stefan Schneider, Raymond Hernandez, Doerte U Junghaenel, Bart Orriens, Pey-Jiuan Lee, Arthur A Stone","doi":"10.1007/s12144-023-04773-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mental processes underlying people's responses to Ecological Momentary Assessments (EMA) have rarely been studied. In cognitive psychology, one of the most popular and successful mental process models is the <i>drift diffusion model</i>. It decomposes response time (RT) data to distinguish how <i>fast</i> information is accessed and processed (\"drift rate\"), and how <i>much</i> information is accessed and processed (\"boundary separation\"). We examined whether the drift diffusion model could be successfully applied to people's RTs for EMA questions and could shed light on between- and within-person variation in the mental process components underlying momentary reports. We analyzed EMA data (up to 6 momentary surveys/day for one week) from 954 participants in the Understanding America Study (29,067 completed measurement occasions). An item-response-theory diffusion model was applied to RTs associated with 5 momentary negative affect ratings. As hypothesized, both diffusion model parameters showed moderate stability across EMA measurement occasions. Drift rate and boundary separation together explained a majority of the variance in the observed RTs and demonstrated correspondence across different sets of EMA items, both within and between individuals. The parameters related in theoretically expected ways to within-person changes in activities (momentary work and recreation) and person-level characteristics (neuroticism and depression). Drift rate increased and boundary separation decreased over the study, suggesting that practice effects in EMA consist of multiple distinctive cognitive processes. The results support the reliability and validity of the diffusion model parameters derived from EMA and provide initial evidence that the model may enhance understanding of process underlying EMA affect ratings.</p>","PeriodicalId":48075,"journal":{"name":"Current Psychology","volume":"75 1","pages":"5868-5886"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12442838/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04773-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Mental processes underlying people's responses to Ecological Momentary Assessments (EMA) have rarely been studied. In cognitive psychology, one of the most popular and successful mental process models is the drift diffusion model. It decomposes response time (RT) data to distinguish how fast information is accessed and processed ("drift rate"), and how much information is accessed and processed ("boundary separation"). We examined whether the drift diffusion model could be successfully applied to people's RTs for EMA questions and could shed light on between- and within-person variation in the mental process components underlying momentary reports. We analyzed EMA data (up to 6 momentary surveys/day for one week) from 954 participants in the Understanding America Study (29,067 completed measurement occasions). An item-response-theory diffusion model was applied to RTs associated with 5 momentary negative affect ratings. As hypothesized, both diffusion model parameters showed moderate stability across EMA measurement occasions. Drift rate and boundary separation together explained a majority of the variance in the observed RTs and demonstrated correspondence across different sets of EMA items, both within and between individuals. The parameters related in theoretically expected ways to within-person changes in activities (momentary work and recreation) and person-level characteristics (neuroticism and depression). Drift rate increased and boundary separation decreased over the study, suggesting that practice effects in EMA consist of multiple distinctive cognitive processes. The results support the reliability and validity of the diffusion model parameters derived from EMA and provide initial evidence that the model may enhance understanding of process underlying EMA affect ratings.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

生态瞬时评价(EMA)中的响应时间:用漂移扩散模型揭示响应过程。
人们对生态瞬间评估(EMA)的反应背后的心理过程很少被研究。在认知心理学中,最流行和最成功的心理过程模型之一是漂移扩散模型。它分解响应时间(RT)数据,以区分访问和处理信息的速度(“漂移率”),以及访问和处理信息的数量(“边界分离”)。我们研究了漂移扩散模型是否可以成功地应用于人们对EMA问题的RTs,并可以阐明瞬间报告背后的心理过程成分的人与人之间和人与人之间的差异。我们分析了了解美国研究中954名参与者(29,067次完成的测量)的EMA数据(每天多达6次瞬时调查,持续一周)。采用项目反应理论扩散模型对5个瞬间负性情绪等级的RTs进行分析。正如假设的那样,两个扩散模型参数在EMA测量场合都表现出适度的稳定性。漂移率和边界分离共同解释了观察到的RTs的大部分差异,并证明了个体内部和个体之间不同组EMA项目之间的对应关系。这些参数以理论上预期的方式与活动(短暂的工作和娱乐)和个人层面特征(神经质和抑郁)的个人变化相关。漂移率增加,边界分离减少,表明EMA的练习效应由多个不同的认知过程组成。结果支持了由EMA导出的扩散模型参数的可靠性和有效性,并提供了初步证据,表明该模型可以增强对EMA影响评级背后过程的理解。
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