University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA.
Assessment. 2023 Jan;30(1):102-110. doi: 10.1177/10731911211044216. Epub 2021 Sep 11.
Researchers use ecological momentary assessment (EMA) to study a range of behaviors related to psychopathology. However, it is unclear whether brief measures of coping behaviors accurately capture the intended responses. In this secondary analysis of a single-case experimental design, eight individuals with borderline personality disorder ( = 21.57, 63% female, 63% Asian American) completed daily diary entries for 12 weeks, along with hourly EMA entries on 2 days. Participants provided qualitative descriptions of their behaviors and classified them into one of five functional categories. Independent researchers also classified each qualitative description into the same categories. Overall, agreement between participants and researchers was low, Krippendorff's α = .47, 95% confidence interval [0.43, 0.52]. The type of emotion experienced, researcher confidence, and word count of responses affected agreement. Generating items that capture the breadth of possible behaviors, are brief enough for frequent administration, and are consistently understood by participants is an important continued challenge in EMA research.
研究人员使用生态瞬时评估（EMA）来研究一系列与精神病理学相关的行为。然而，目前尚不清楚应对行为的简短测量是否能准确捕捉到预期的反应。在这项单案例实验设计的二次分析中，8 名边缘型人格障碍患者（n=21.57，63%为女性，63%为亚裔美国人）完成了为期 12 周的日常日记记录，并在 2 天内进行了每小时 EMA 记录。参与者提供了对其行为的定性描述，并将其归类为五个功能类别之一。独立研究人员也将每个定性描述归入相同的类别。总体而言，参与者和研究人员之间的一致性较低，Krippendorff 的 α=0.47，95%置信区间为[0.43,0.52]。所经历的情绪类型、研究人员的信心和回复的字数都会影响一致性。生成能够捕捉到可能行为的广度、足够简短以便频繁管理以及参与者始终理解的项目，这是 EMA 研究中的一个重要持续挑战。
