TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluation of Pressing Issues in Ecological Momentary Assessment
AU - Stone, Arthur A.
AU - Schneider, Stefan
AU - Smyth, Joshua M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 Annual Reviews Inc.. All rights reserved.
PY - 2023/5/9
Y1 - 2023/5/9
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85149295098&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85149295098&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-080921-083128
DO - 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-080921-083128
M3 - Review article
C2 - 36475718
AN - SCOPUS:85149295098
SN - 1548-5943
VL - 19
SP - 107
EP - 131
JO - Annual Review of Clinical Psychology
JF - Annual Review of Clinical Psychology
ER -