Allison A M Bielak, Jacqueline A Mogle, Martin J Sliwinski
{"title":"活动因子结构的人内与人间差异:一项生态瞬时评价研究的结果。","authors":"Allison A M Bielak, Jacqueline A Mogle, Martin J Sliwinski","doi":"10.1093/geronb/gbaf017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Studies using ecological momentary assessment (EMA) of activity participation rely on items tapping domains informed by factor analyses based on single time points. Analyses from a single time point focus on differences between participants and provide little insight into how activities cluster together within a person across moments or days. The present study compared the factor structure in activity participation between- and within-persons using an expanded set of momentary activity items in middle and older adulthood.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using tablets, 81 adults aged 41 to 94 years reported activities completed in the past 3-4 hr 5 times per day for 14 days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most common activities during the day involved social interactions, reading, and computer work. Watching TV or videos was the most common evening activity. Multilevel factor analysis simultaneously computed both intra-individual factors (within-person) and inter-individual factors (between-person). Four within-person and 4 between-person factors provided the best model fit, with 3 common factors: cognitive (read, computer); social (events, mentoring, providing care); and passive (TV, games). There were notable differences in the fourth factor.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Although three common activity factors were found between individuals and within persons from day to day, the divergence between the fourth intra- and inter-individual factors provides insight into how activity engagement operates at different timescales and likely reflects daily demands versus long-term goals. EMA provides a window into engagement throughout and across days, but researchers who commonly use retrospective reports of between-person activity engagement may find distinctly different results from factor analyses.</p>","PeriodicalId":56111,"journal":{"name":"Journals of Gerontology Series B-Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11974389/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Within- and Between-Person Differences in Activity Factor Structure: Results From an Ecological Momentary Assessment Study.\",\"authors\":\"Allison A M Bielak, Jacqueline A Mogle, Martin J Sliwinski\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/geronb/gbaf017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Studies using ecological momentary assessment (EMA) of activity participation rely on items tapping domains informed by factor analyses based on single time points. Analyses from a single time point focus on differences between participants and provide little insight into how activities cluster together within a person across moments or days. The present study compared the factor structure in activity participation between- and within-persons using an expanded set of momentary activity items in middle and older adulthood.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using tablets, 81 adults aged 41 to 94 years reported activities completed in the past 3-4 hr 5 times per day for 14 days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most common activities during the day involved social interactions, reading, and computer work. Watching TV or videos was the most common evening activity. Multilevel factor analysis simultaneously computed both intra-individual factors (within-person) and inter-individual factors (between-person). Four within-person and 4 between-person factors provided the best model fit, with 3 common factors: cognitive (read, computer); social (events, mentoring, providing care); and passive (TV, games). There were notable differences in the fourth factor.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Although three common activity factors were found between individuals and within persons from day to day, the divergence between the fourth intra- and inter-individual factors provides insight into how activity engagement operates at different timescales and likely reflects daily demands versus long-term goals. EMA provides a window into engagement throughout and across days, but researchers who commonly use retrospective reports of between-person activity engagement may find distinctly different results from factor analyses.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56111,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journals of Gerontology Series B-Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11974389/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journals of Gerontology Series B-Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbaf017\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journals of Gerontology Series B-Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbaf017","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Within- and Between-Person Differences in Activity Factor Structure: Results From an Ecological Momentary Assessment Study.
Objectives: Studies using ecological momentary assessment (EMA) of activity participation rely on items tapping domains informed by factor analyses based on single time points. Analyses from a single time point focus on differences between participants and provide little insight into how activities cluster together within a person across moments or days. The present study compared the factor structure in activity participation between- and within-persons using an expanded set of momentary activity items in middle and older adulthood.
Methods: Using tablets, 81 adults aged 41 to 94 years reported activities completed in the past 3-4 hr 5 times per day for 14 days.
Results: The most common activities during the day involved social interactions, reading, and computer work. Watching TV or videos was the most common evening activity. Multilevel factor analysis simultaneously computed both intra-individual factors (within-person) and inter-individual factors (between-person). Four within-person and 4 between-person factors provided the best model fit, with 3 common factors: cognitive (read, computer); social (events, mentoring, providing care); and passive (TV, games). There were notable differences in the fourth factor.
Discussion: Although three common activity factors were found between individuals and within persons from day to day, the divergence between the fourth intra- and inter-individual factors provides insight into how activity engagement operates at different timescales and likely reflects daily demands versus long-term goals. EMA provides a window into engagement throughout and across days, but researchers who commonly use retrospective reports of between-person activity engagement may find distinctly different results from factor analyses.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences publishes articles on development in adulthood and old age that advance the psychological science of aging processes and outcomes. Articles have clear implications for theoretical or methodological innovation in the psychology of aging or contribute significantly to the empirical understanding of psychological processes and aging. Areas of interest include, but are not limited to, attitudes, clinical applications, cognition, education, emotion, health, human factors, interpersonal relations, neuropsychology, perception, personality, physiological psychology, social psychology, and sensation.