Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Convergence of real-time and retrospective assessments: A systematic investigation of naturally occurring and experimentally induced intrusions.
Peters, Jacqueline; Freund, Inga Marie; Kindt, Merel; Visser, Renée M; van Emmerik, Arnold A P.
Affiliation
  • Peters J; Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Electronic address: j.peters@uva.nl.
  • Freund IM; Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
  • Kindt M; Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
  • Visser RM; Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Electronic address: r.m.visser@uva.nl.
  • van Emmerik AAP; Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry ; 85: 101981, 2024 Jul 15.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39084141
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND

OBJECTIVES:

Ecological momentary assessment is a popular method for monitoring symptoms in real-time. Especially for fleeting experiences, such as intrusions, real-time assessments may be more accurate than retrospective estimates. However, there are concerns regarding reactivity effects associated with real-time assessments and, conversely, the reliance on bias-prone retrospective assessments in clinical science and practice. In this study we used a between-groups design to examine whether real-time intrusion assessments influence retrospective reports (aim 1). Then, we investigated whether real-time and retrospective assessments systematically differed within individuals (aim 2).

METHODS:

Over two weeks, 150 non-clinical individuals provided weekly retrospective intrusion assessments, while the majority (n = 102) additionally reported their intrusions in real-time, via smartphones. We examined both naturally occurring intrusions, which individuals experience in their everyday lives, and intrusions related to a standardized stressor (i.e., Trier Social Stress Test), taking place halfway.

RESULTS:

Using Bayesian statistics, we found that assessing intrusions in real-time did not convincingly affect retrospective reports, and there was no strong evidence that real-time and retrospective intrusion assessments differed. However, the evidence of absence was inconclusive for some measures. Real-time and retrospectively reported intrusion frequencies and distress were strongly associated with one another.

LIMITATIONS:

Future research is advised to replicate these findings with larger samples, for other types of stressors, in clinical populations, and over extended assessment periods.

CONCLUSIONS:

The general agreement between real-time and retrospective assessments of intrusions is encouraging, tentatively suggesting that researchers and clinicians can flexibly select the assessment method that best suits their objectives.
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry Year: 2024 Document type: Article

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry Year: 2024 Document type: Article