Integrating State and Trait: Validating the NEO Using EMA Data

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin A. Hallgren ◽  
Lauren M. Schaefer ◽  
Marika Solhan ◽  
Seungmin Jahng ◽  
Timothy J. Trull
Keyword(s):  
Ema Data

Articulatory VCV synthesis from EMA data

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Asterios Toutios ◽  
Shinji Maeda
Keyword(s):  
Ema Data

scholarly journals Differences in Affective Dynamics Among Eating-Disorder Diagnostic Groups

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 857-871
Author(s):  
Gail A. Williams-Kerver ◽  
Stephen A. Wonderlich ◽  
Ross D. Crosby ◽  
Li Cao ◽  
Kathryn E. Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Eating Disorder ◽  
Ecological Momentary Assessment ◽  
Mixed Models ◽  
Emotional Experience ◽  
Affect Intensity ◽  
Emotion Differentiation ◽  
Affective Experiences ◽  
Ecological Momentary ◽  
Ema Data ◽  
Momentary Assessment

Emotion-regulation theories suggest that affect intensity is crucial in the development and maintenance of eating disorders. However, other aspects of emotional experience, such as lability, differentiation, and inertia, are not as well understood. This study is the first to use ecological momentary assessment (EMA) to examine differences in several daily negative affect (NA) indicators among adults diagnosed with anorexia nervosa (AN), bulimia nervosa (BN), or binge-eating disorder (BED). We used EMA data from three large studies to run a series of linear mixed models; the results showed that participants in the AN and BN groups experienced significantly greater NA intensity and better emotion differentiation than participants in the BED group. Alternatively, the BN group demonstrated significantly greater NA lability than the AN group and greater NA inertia than the BED group. These results suggest that several daily affective experiences differ among eating-disorder diagnostic groups and have implications toward distinct conceptualizations and treatments.

scholarly journals Affect fluctuations examined with ecological momentary assessment in patients with current or remitted depression and anxiety disorders

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. A. Schoevers ◽  
C. D. van Borkulo ◽  
F. Lamers ◽  
M.N. Servaas ◽  
J. A. Bastiaansen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Anxiety Disorders ◽  
Ecological Momentary Assessment ◽  
Affect Regulation ◽  
Depression And Anxiety ◽  
Remitted Depression ◽  
Ecological Momentary ◽  
Ema Data ◽  
Momentary Assessment ◽  
A Current

Abstract Background There is increasing interest in day-to-day affect fluctuations of patients with depressive and anxiety disorders. Few studies have compared repeated assessments of positive affect (PA) and negative affect (NA) across diagnostic groups, and fluctuation patterns were not uniformly defined. The aim of this study is to compare affect fluctuations in patients with a current episode of depressive or anxiety disorder, in remitted patients and in controls, using affect instability as a core concept but also describing other measures of variability and adjusting for possible confounders. Methods Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) data were obtained from 365 participants of the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety with current (n = 95), remitted (n = 178) or no (n = 92) DSM-IV defined depression/anxiety disorder. For 2 weeks, five times per day, participants filled-out items on PA and NA. Affect instability was calculated as the root mean square of successive differences (RMSSD). Tests on group differences in RMSSD, within-person variance, and autocorrelation were performed, controlling for mean affect levels. Results Current depression/anxiety patients had the highest affect instability in both PA and NA, followed by remitters and then controls. Instability differences between groups remained significant when controlling for mean affect levels, but differences between current and remitted were no longer significant. Conclusions Patients with a current disorder have higher instability of NA and PA than remitted patients and controls. Especially with regard to NA, this could be interpreted as patients with a current disorder being more sensitive to internal and external stressors and having suboptimal affect regulation.

scholarly journals Metadata Correction: Mobile Phone Ownership Is Not a Serious Barrier to Participation in Studies: Descriptive Study (Preprint)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily J Harvey ◽  
Leslie F Rubin ◽  
Sabrina L Smiley ◽  
Yitong Zhou ◽  
Hoda Elmasry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Mobile Phone ◽  
Mobile Phones ◽  
Text Messaging ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Smoking History ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Study Participation ◽  
Major Barrier ◽  
Ema Data

BACKGROUND Rather than providing participants with study-specific data collection devices, their personal mobile phones are increasingly being used as a means for collecting geolocation and ecological momentary assessment (EMA) data in public health research. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to (1) describe the sociodemographic characteristics of respondents to an online survey screener assessing eligibility to participate in a mixed methods study collecting geolocation and EMA data via the participants’ personal mobile phones, and (2) examine how eligibility criteria requiring mobile phone ownership and an unlimited text messaging plan affected participant inclusion. METHODS Adult (≥18 years) daily smokers were recruited via public advertisements, free weekly newspapers, printed flyers, and word of mouth. An online survey screener was used as the initial method of determining eligibility for study participation. The survey screened for twenty-eight inclusion criteria grouped into three categories, which included (1) cell phone use, (2) tobacco use, and (3) additional criteria. RESULTS A total of 1003 individuals completed the online screener. Respondents were predominantly African American (605/1003, 60.3%) (60.4%), male (514/1003, 51.3%), and had a median age of 35 years (IQR 26-50). Nearly 50% (496/1003, 49.5%) were unemployed. Most smoked menthol cigarettes (699/1003, 69.7%), and had a median smoking history of 11 years (IQR 5-21). The majority owned a mobile phone (739/1003, 73.7%), could install apps (86.8%), used their mobile phone daily (89.5%), and had an unlimited text messaging plan (871/1003, 86.8%). Of those who completed the online screener, 302 were eligible to participate in the study; 163 were eligible after rescreening, and 117 were enrolled in the study. Compared to employed individuals, a significantly greater proportion of those who were unemployed were ineligible for the study based on mobile phone inclusion criteria (P<.001); yet, 46.4% (333/717) of the individuals who were unemployed met all mobile phone inclusion criteria. CONCLUSIONS Inclusion criteria requiring participants to use their personal mobile phones for data collection was not a major barrier to study participation for most respondents who completed the online screener, including those who were unemployed. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02261363; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02261363 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6wOmDluSt)

scholarly journals A Review of Explicit and Implicit Assumptions When Providing Personalized Feedback Based on Self-Report EMA Data

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
IJsbrand Leertouwer ◽  
Angélique O. J. Cramer ◽  
Jeroen K. Vermunt ◽  
Noémi K. Schuurman
Keyword(s):  
Self Report ◽  
Data Driven ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Personalized Feedback ◽  
Retrospective Assessment ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Ecological Momentary ◽  
Ema Data ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Momentary Assessment

Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) in which participants report on their moment-to-moment experiences in their natural environment, is a hot topic. An emerging field in clinical psychology based on either EMA, or what we term Ecological Retrospective Assessment (ERA) as it requires retrospectivity, is the field of personalized feedback. In this field, EMA/ERA-data-driven summaries are presented to participants with the goal of promoting their insight in their experiences. Underlying this procedure are some fundamental assumptions about (i) the relation between true moment-to-moment experiences and retrospective evaluations of those experiences, (ii) the translation of these experiences and evaluations to different types of data, (iii) the comparison of these different types of data, and (iv) the impact of a summary of moment-to-moment experiences on retrospective evaluations of those experiences. We argue that these assumptions deserve further exploration, in order to create a strong evidence-based foundation for the personalized feedback procedure.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document