The ILHBN: challenges, opportunities, and solutions from harmonizing data under heterogeneous study designs, target populations, and measurement protocols.

The ILHBN is funded by the National Institutes of Health to collaboratively study the interactive dynamics of behavior, health, and the environment using Intensive Longitudinal Data (ILD) to (a) understand and intervene on behavior and health and (b) develop new analytic methods to innovate behavioral theories and interventions. The heterogenous study designs, populations, and measurement protocols adopted by the seven studies within the ILHBN created practical challenges, but also unprecedented opportunities to capitalize on data harmonization to provide comparable views of data from different studies, enhance the quality and utility of expensive and hard-won ILD, and amplify scientific yield. The purpose of this article is to provide a brief report of the challenges, opportunities, and solutions from some of the ILHBN's cross-study data harmonization efforts. We review the process through which harmonization challenges and opportunities motivated the development of tools and collection of metadata within the ILHBN. A variety of strategies have been adopted within the ILHBN to facilitate harmonization of ecological momentary assessment, location, accelerometer, and participant engagement data while preserving theory-driven heterogeneity and data privacy considerations. Several tools have been developed by the ILHBN to resolve challenges in integrating ILD across multiple data streams and time scales both within and across studies. Harmonization of distinct longitudinal measures, measurement tools, and sampling rates across studies is challenging, but also opens up new opportunities to address cross-cutting scientific themes of interest.

Health behavior changes, such as prevention of suicidal thoughts and behaviors, smoking, drug use, and alcohol use; and the promotion of mental health, sleep, and physical activities, and decreases in sedentary behavior, are difficult to sustain. The ILHBN is a cooperative agreement network funded jointly by seven participating units within the National Institutes of Health to collaboratively study how factors that occur in individuals' everyday life and in their natural environment influence the success of positive health behavior changes. This article discusses how information collected using smartphones, wearables, and other devices can provide helpful active and passive reflections of the participants' extent of risk and resources at the moment for an extended period of time. However, successful engagement and retention of participants also require tailored adaptations of study designs, measurement tools, measurement intervals, study span, and device choices that create hurdles in integrating (harmonizing) data from multiple studies. We describe some of the challenges, opportunities, and solutions that emerged from harmonizing intensive longitudinal data under heterogeneous study and participant characteristics within the ILHBN, and share some tools and recommendations to facilitate future data harmonization efforts.

Individual differences in mixing costs relate to general executive functioning.

The ability to enact cognitive control under changing environmental demands is commonly studied using set-shifting paradigms. While the control processes required for task set reconfiguration (switch costs) have been studied extensively, less research has focused on the control required during task repetition in blocks containing multiple tasks as compared to those containing a single task (mixing costs). We investigated how individual differences in mixing costs related to other executive functions (EFs) in a large sample (N = 749) of young adults. Individual differences in mixing costs across three different set-shifting paradigms loaded significantly onto a mixing cost latent variable. This Mixing Cost factor moderately correlated with a Common EF factor capturing variance shared across nine EF tasks designed to tap response inhibition, working memory updating, and mental set-shifting. It did not correlate with Updating-Specific and Shifting-Specific factors. Results indicate that the additional cognitive control required during mixed-task block repeat trials relies on general executive processes, as well as unique abilities distinct from both set-shifting and working memory updating. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).