生态瞬时评价中的紧迫问题评价

IF 17.8 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY
Arthur A Stone, Stefan Schneider, Joshua M Smyth
{"title":"生态瞬时评价中的紧迫问题评价","authors":"Arthur A Stone,&nbsp;Stefan Schneider,&nbsp;Joshua M Smyth","doi":"10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-080921-083128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The use of repeated, momentary, real-world assessment methods known as the Experience Sampling Method and Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) has been broadly embraced over the last few decades. These methods have extended our assessment reach beyond lengthy retrospective self-reports as they can capture everyday experiences in their immediate context, including affect, behavior, symptoms, and cognitions. In this review we evaluate nine conceptual, methodological, and psychometric issues about EMA with the goal of stimulating conversation and guiding future research on these matters: the extent to which participants are actually reporting momentary experiences, respondents' interpretation of momentary questions, the use of comparison standards in responding, efforts to increase the EMA reporting period beyond the moment to longer periods within a day, training of EMA study participants, concerns about selection bias of respondents, the impact of missing EMA assessments, the reliability of momentary data, and for which purposes EMA might be considered a gold standard for assessment. Resolution of these issues should have far-reaching implications for advancing the field.</p>","PeriodicalId":50755,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Clinical Psychology","volume":"19 ","pages":"107-131"},"PeriodicalIF":17.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of Pressing Issues in Ecological Momentary Assessment.\",\"authors\":\"Arthur A Stone,&nbsp;Stefan Schneider,&nbsp;Joshua M Smyth\",\"doi\":\"10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-080921-083128\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The use of repeated, momentary, real-world assessment methods known as the Experience Sampling Method and Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) has been broadly embraced over the last few decades. These methods have extended our assessment reach beyond lengthy retrospective self-reports as they can capture everyday experiences in their immediate context, including affect, behavior, symptoms, and cognitions. In this review we evaluate nine conceptual, methodological, and psychometric issues about EMA with the goal of stimulating conversation and guiding future research on these matters: the extent to which participants are actually reporting momentary experiences, respondents' interpretation of momentary questions, the use of comparison standards in responding, efforts to increase the EMA reporting period beyond the moment to longer periods within a day, training of EMA study participants, concerns about selection bias of respondents, the impact of missing EMA assessments, the reliability of momentary data, and for which purposes EMA might be considered a gold standard for assessment. Resolution of these issues should have far-reaching implications for advancing the field.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50755,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annual Review of Clinical Psychology\",\"volume\":\"19 \",\"pages\":\"107-131\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":17.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annual Review of Clinical Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-080921-083128\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annual Review of Clinical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-080921-083128","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

在过去的几十年里,使用重复的、瞬间的、真实世界的评估方法,即经验抽样法和生态瞬间评估(EMA),已经被广泛接受。这些方法扩展了我们的评估范围,超越了冗长的回顾性自我报告,因为它们可以捕捉日常经历的直接背景,包括情感、行为、症状和认知。在这篇综述中,我们评估了关于EMA的9个概念、方法和心理测量问题,目的是激发对话并指导未来的研究:参与者实际报告瞬时经历的程度、受访者对瞬时问题的解释、在回答中使用比较标准、将EMA报告周期从瞬间延长到一天内更长时间的努力、EMA研究参与者的培训、对受访者选择偏差的担忧、缺失EMA评估的影响、瞬时数据的可靠性、因此,EMA可能被视为评估的黄金标准。这些问题的解决将对该领域的发展产生深远的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of Pressing Issues in Ecological Momentary Assessment.

The use of repeated, momentary, real-world assessment methods known as the Experience Sampling Method and Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) has been broadly embraced over the last few decades. These methods have extended our assessment reach beyond lengthy retrospective self-reports as they can capture everyday experiences in their immediate context, including affect, behavior, symptoms, and cognitions. In this review we evaluate nine conceptual, methodological, and psychometric issues about EMA with the goal of stimulating conversation and guiding future research on these matters: the extent to which participants are actually reporting momentary experiences, respondents' interpretation of momentary questions, the use of comparison standards in responding, efforts to increase the EMA reporting period beyond the moment to longer periods within a day, training of EMA study participants, concerns about selection bias of respondents, the impact of missing EMA assessments, the reliability of momentary data, and for which purposes EMA might be considered a gold standard for assessment. Resolution of these issues should have far-reaching implications for advancing the field.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
31.50
自引率
0.50%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: The Annual Review of Clinical Psychology is a publication that has been available since 2005. It offers comprehensive reviews on significant developments in the field of clinical psychology and psychiatry. The journal covers various aspects including research, theory, and the application of psychological principles to address recognized disorders such as schizophrenia, mood, anxiety, childhood, substance use, cognitive, and personality disorders. Additionally, the articles also touch upon broader issues that cut across the field, such as diagnosis, treatment, social policy, and cross-cultural and legal issues. Recently, the current volume of this journal has transitioned from a gated access model to an open access format through the Annual Reviews' Subscribe to Open program. All articles published in this volume are now available under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY), allowing for widespread distribution and use. The journal is also abstracted and indexed in various databases including Scopus, Science Citation Index Expanded, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Academic Search, among others.
×
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