Assessing repetitive negative thinking in daily life: Development of an ecological momentary assessment paradigm

Repetitive negative thinking (RNT) is a transdiagnostic process and a promising target for prevention and treatment of mental disorders. RNT is typically assessed via self-report ques-tionnaires with most studies focusing on one type of RNT (i.e., worry or rumination) and one specific disorder (i.e., anxiety or depression). However, responses to such questionnaires may be biased by memory and metacognitive beliefs. Recently, Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) has been employed to minimize these biases. This study aims to develop an EMA paradigm to measure RNT as a transdiagnostic process in natural settings. Based on empirical and theoretical considerations, an item pool was created encompassing RNT content and processes. We then (1) tested model fit of a content-related and a process-related model for assessing RNT as an individual difference variable, (2) investigated the reliability and construct validity of the proposed scale(s), and (3) determined the optimal sampling design. One hundred fifty healthy participants aged 18 to 40 years filled out baseline questionnaires on rumination, worry, RNT, symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress. Participants received 8 semi-random daily prompts assessing RNT over 14 days. After the EMA phase, participants answered questionnaires on depression, anxiety, and stress again.Multilevel confirmatory factor analysis revealed excellent model fit for the process-related model but unsatisfactory fit for the content-related model. Different hybrid models were addi-tionally explored, yielding one model with satisfactory fit. Both the process-related and the hybrid scale showed good reliability and good convergent validity and were significantly as-sociated with symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress after the EMA phase when con-trolling for baseline scores. Further analyses found that a sampling design of 5 daily assess-ments across 10 days yielded the best tradeoff between participant burden and information retained by EMA. In sum, this paper presents a promising paradigm for assessing RNT in daily life.

Download Full-text

Repetitive negative thinking predicts eating disorder behaviors: A pilot ecological momentary assessment study in a treatment seeking eating disorder sample

Behaviour Research and Therapy ◽

10.1016/j.brat.2018.11.005 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 112 ◽

pp. 12-17 ◽

Cited By ~ 11

Author(s):

Margarita Sala ◽

Leigh C. Brosof ◽

Cheri A. Levinson

Keyword(s):

Eating Disorder ◽

Ecological Momentary Assessment ◽

Treatment Seeking ◽

Repetitive Negative Thinking ◽

Negative Thinking ◽

Assessment Study ◽

Ecological Momentary ◽

Momentary Assessment ◽

Eating Disorder Behaviors

Download Full-text

Temporal Dynamics of PERMA Building Blocks and Well-being in Daily Life: An Ecological Momentary Assessment

10.31234/osf.io/gs2vd ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Saeideh Heshmati ◽

Zita Oravecz

Keyword(s):

Ecological Momentary Assessment ◽

Temporal Dynamics ◽

Daily Life ◽

Well Being ◽

Building Blocks ◽

Individual Variability ◽

Future Research ◽

Dynamical Features ◽

Ecological Momentary ◽

Momentary Assessment

Most assessments of well-being have relied on retrospective accounts, measured by global evaluative well-being scales. Following the recent debates focused on the assessment of hedonic and eudaimonic well-being based on the elements of the PERMA theory, the current study aimed to shed further light onto the measurement of PERMA elements in daily life and their temporal dynamics. Through an Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) design (N=160), we examined the dynamics of change (e.g., baselines and intra-individual variability) in the PERMA elements using the mPERMA measure, which is an EMA-adapted version of the PERMA Profiler. Findings revealed that momentary experiences of well-being, quantified via PERMA elements, map onto their corresponding hedonic or eudaimonic well-being components, and its dynamical features provide novel insights into predicting global well-being. This work offers avenues for future research to assess well-being in real-time and real-world contexts in ecologically valid ways, while eliminating recall bias.

Download Full-text

Corrigendum to “Ecological momentary assessment in the investigation of craving and substance use in daily life: A systematic review” Drug and Alcohol Dependence 148 (2015) 1–20

Drug and Alcohol Dependence ◽

10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2015.03.001 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 154 ◽

pp. 305-314 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Fuschia Serre ◽

Melina Fatseas ◽

Joel Swendsen ◽

Marc Auriacombe

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Substance Use ◽

Alcohol Dependence ◽

Ecological Momentary Assessment ◽

Daily Life ◽

Ecological Momentary ◽

Drug And Alcohol ◽

Momentary Assessment

Download Full-text

A Coordinated Analysis of Variance in Affect in Daily Life

Assessment ◽

10.1177/1073191118799460 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 27 (8) ◽

pp. 1683-1698 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Stacey B. Scott ◽

Martin J. Sliwinski ◽

Matthew Zawadzki ◽

Robert S. Stawski ◽

Jinhyuk Kim ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Negative Affect ◽

Positive Affect ◽

Ecological Momentary Assessment ◽

Daily Life ◽

Daily Diary ◽

Levels Of Analysis ◽

Total N ◽

Ecological Momentary ◽

Momentary Assessment ◽

Widespread Interest

Despite widespread interest in variance in affect, basic questions remain pertaining to the relative proportions of between-person and within-person variance, the contribution of days and moments, and the reliability of these estimates. We addressed these questions by decomposing negative affect and positive affect variance across three levels (person, day, moment), and calculating reliability using a coordinated analysis of seven daily diary, ecological momentary assessment (EMA), and diary-EMA hybrid studies (across studies age = 18-84 years, total Npersons = 2,103, total Nobservations = 45,065). Across studies, within-person variance was sizeable (negative affect: 45% to 66%, positive affect: 25% to 74%); in EMA more within-person variance was attributable to momentary rather than daily level. Reliability was adequate to high at all levels of analysis (within-person: .73-.91; between-person: .96-1.00) despite different items and designs. We discuss the implications of these results for the design of future intensive studies of affect variance.

Download Full-text