Department of Information Science, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa.
School of Management, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Nat Hum Behav. 2021 Nov;5(11):1535-1547. doi: 10.1038/s41562-021-01117-5. Epub 2021 May 17.
There is widespread public and academic interest in understanding the uses and effects of digital media. Scholars primarily use self-report measures of the quantity or duration of media use as proxies for more objective measures, but the validity of these self-reports remains unclear. Advancements in data collection techniques have produced a collection of studies indexing both self-reported and log-based measures. To assess the alignment between these measures, we conducted a pre-registered meta-analysis of this research. Based on 106 effect sizes, we found that self-reported media use correlates only moderately with logged measurements, that self-reports were rarely an accurate reflection of logged media use and that measures of problematic media use show an even weaker association with usage logs. These findings raise concerns about the validity of findings relying solely on self-reported measures of media use.
公众和学术界普遍有兴趣了解数字媒体的使用和影响。学者们主要使用自我报告的媒体使用数量或时长来作为更客观的测量手段的替代,但这些自我报告的有效性仍不清楚。数据收集技术的进步产生了一系列索引自我报告和基于日志的测量的研究。为了评估这些测量手段之间的一致性,我们对这项研究进行了预先注册的荟萃分析。基于 106 个效应量,我们发现自我报告的媒体使用与日志记录的测量结果只有中等程度的相关,自我报告很少能准确反映日志记录的媒体使用情况,而有问题的媒体使用的测量手段与使用日志的关联更弱。这些发现引起了人们对仅依赖自我报告的媒体使用测量手段的研究结果的有效性的担忧。