Momentary Influences on Self-Regulation in Two Populations With Health Risk Behaviors: Adults Who Smoke and Adults Who Are Overweight and Have Binge-Eating Disorder.

Introduction: Self-regulation has been implicated in health risk behaviors and is a target of many health behavior interventions. Despite most prior research focusing on self-regulation as an individual-level trait, we hypothesize that self-regulation is a time-varying mechanism of health and risk behavior that may be influenced by momentary contexts to a substantial degree. Because most health behaviors (e.g., eating, drinking, smoking) occur in the context of everyday activities, digital technologies may help us better understand and influence these behaviors in real time. Using a momentary self-regulation measure, the current study (which was part of a larger multi-year research project on the science of behavior change) used ecological momentary assessment (EMA) to assess if self-regulation can be engaged and manipulated on a momentary basis in naturalistic, non-laboratory settings. Methods: This one-arm, open-label exploratory study prospectively collected momentary data for 14 days from 104 participants who smoked regularly and 81 participants who were overweight and had binge-eating disorder. Four times per day, participants were queried about momentary self-regulation, emotional state, and social and environmental context; recent smoking and exposure to smoking cues (smoking sample only); and recent eating, binge eating, and exposure to binge-eating cues (binge-eating sample only). This study used a novel, momentary self-regulation measure comprised of four subscales: momentary perseverance, momentary sensation seeking, momentary self-judgment, and momentary mindfulness. Participants were also instructed to engage with Laddr, a mobile application that provides evidence-based health behavior change tools via an integrated platform. The association between momentary context and momentary self-regulation was explored via mixed-effects models. Exploratory assessments of whether recent Laddr use (defined as use within 12 h of momentary responses) modified the association between momentary context and momentary self-regulation were performed via mixed-effects models. Results: Participants (mean age 35.2; 78% female) in the smoking and binge-eating samples contributed a total of 3,233 and 3,481 momentary questionnaires, respectively. Momentary self-regulation subscales were associated with several momentary contexts, in the combined as well as smoking and binge-eating samples. For example, in the combined sample momentary perseverance was associated with location, positively associated with positive affect, and negatively associated with negative affect, stress, and tiredness. In the smoking sample, momentary perseverance was positively associated with momentary difficulty in accessing cigarettes, caffeine intake, and momentary restraint in smoking, and negatively associated with temptation and urge to smoke. In the binge-eating sample, momentary perseverance was positively associated with difficulty in accessing food and restraint in eating, and negatively associated with urge to binge eat. While recent Laddr use was not associated directly with momentary self-regulation subscales, it did modify several of the contextual associations, including challenging contexts. Conclusions: Overall, this study provides preliminary evidence that momentary self-regulation may vary in response to differing momentary contexts in samples from two exemplar populations with risk behaviors. In addition, the Laddr application may modify some of these relationships. These findings demonstrate the possibility of measuring momentary self-regulation in a trans-diagnostic way and assessing the effects of momentary, mobile interventions in context. Health behavior change interventions may consider measuring and targeting momentary self-regulation in addition to trait-level self-regulation to better understand and improve health risk behaviors. This work will be used to inform a later stage of research focused on assessing the transdiagnostic mediating effect of momentary self-regulation on medical regimen adherence and health outcomes. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT03352713.

Identifying the representational structure of affect using fMRI.

The events we experience day to day can be described in terms of their affective quality: some are rewarding, others are upsetting, and still others are inconsequential. These natural distinctions reflect an underlying representational structure used to classify affective quality. In affective psychology, many experiments model this representational structure with two dimensions, using either the dimensions of valence and arousal, or alternatively, the dimensions of positivity and negativity. Using fMRI, we show that it is optimal to use all four dimensions to examine the data. Our findings include: (1) a gradient representation of valence that is anatomically organized along the fusiform gyrus, and (2) distinct subregions within bilateral amygdala that track arousal versus negativity. Importantly, these results would have remained concealed had either of the commonly used 2-dimensional approaches been adopted a priori, demonstrating the utility of our approach.

Item Response Theory Analysis of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire and its Short Forms.

OBJECTIVES: The Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ) is a self-report measure of mindfulness with forms of several different lengths, including the FFMQ-39, FFMQ-24, and FFMQ-15. We use item response theory analysis to directly compare the functioning of these three forms. METHODS: Data were drawn from a non-clinical Amazon Mechanical Turk study (N = 522) and studies of aftercare treatment of individuals with substance use disorders (combined N = 454). The item and test functioning of the three FFMQ forms were studied and compared. RESULTS: All 39 items were strongly related to the facet latent variables, and the items discriminated over a similar range of the latent mindfulness constructs. Items provided more information in the low to medium range of latent mindfulness than in the high range. Scores in three of the five FFMQ-39 facets were unreliable when measuring individuals in the high range of latent mindfulness, resulting from ceiling effects in item responses. Reliability in the high range of mindfulness was further reduced in the FFMQ-24 and FFMQ-15, such that short forms may be ill-suited for applications that require reliable measurement in the high range. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest the existing FFMQ item pool cannot be reduced without negatively affecting either overall reliability or the span of mindfulness over which reliability is assessed. Conditional test reliability curves and item functioning parameters can aid investigators in tailoring their choice of FFMQ form to the reliability they hope to achieve and to the range of latent mindfulness over which they must reliably measure.

Evaluating the Factor Structure of Each Facet of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire.

OBJECTIVE: Nearly all studies treat the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire as five independent scales (one measuring each of the five facets), yet almost no methodological work has examined the psychometric structure of the facets independently. We address this gap using factor analytic methods. METHODS: Exploratory and confirmatory factor models were fit to item response data from a sample of 522 adults recruited online. Findings were replicated in a sample of 454 adults receiving aftercare for substance use disorder. RESULTS: Parallel analysis suggested multiple factors for all five facets, in both samples. Exploratory factor models suggested the presence of method factors on the acting with awareness (items using the term "distraction") and describing facets (items that were reverse-scored). Confirmatory factor models fit poorly for all facets, in both samples. In follow-up analyses, model fit improved substantially on the acting with awareness and describing facets when method factors were included in a bifactor model. Model fit was also better for the facets of FFMQ short forms than for the full-length facets. The short-form facets and original facets correlated similarly with external criteria in both samples. CONCLUSIONS: None of the FFMQ facets fit a unidimensional factor model; yet, follow-up analyses suggested each can be considered substantively unidimensional. Initial tests suggest the facets' multidimensionality did not materially impact their relation to other psychological constructs, suggesting multidimensionality can be ignored for some purposes. The use of short-form facets or latent variable models (e.g., bifactor specifications) are both viable solutions for addressing multidimensionality when desired.