Howard Andrea L, Lamb Megan
Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Assessment. 2024 Mar;31(2):277-290. doi: 10.1177/10731911231159937. Epub 2023 Mar 13.
High compliance is a priority for successful ecological momentary assessment (EMA) research, but meta-analyses of between-study differences show that reasons for missed prompts remain unclear. We examined compliance data from a 14-week, 182-survey EMA study of undergraduate alcohol use to test differences over time and across survey types between participants with better and worse compliance rates, and to evaluate the impact of incentives on ongoing participation. Participants were = 196 students (65.8% female; = 20.6). Overall compliance was 76.5%, declining gradually from 88.9% to 70% over 14 weeks. Declines were faster in participants with lower overall compliance, but we found no demographic, personality, mental health, or substance use differences between participants with better versus worse compliance rates. Compliance varied by survey type, and unannounced bonus incentives did not impact compliance rates. Participants completed fewer surveys the week after winning a gift card. We offer recommendations for designing future EMA studies.
高依从性是成功进行生态瞬时评估(EMA)研究的首要任务,但对研究间差异的荟萃分析表明,错过提示的原因仍不明确。我们检查了一项为期14周、包含182次调查的关于本科学生饮酒情况的EMA研究中的依从性数据,以测试依从率较高和较低的参与者在不同时间以及不同调查类型之间的差异,并评估激励措施对持续参与的影响。参与者为n = 196名学生(65.8%为女性;M = 20.6)。总体依从率为76.5%,在14周内从88.9%逐渐下降至70%。总体依从性较低的参与者下降速度更快,但我们发现依从率较高和较低的参与者在人口统计学、性格、心理健康或物质使用方面没有差异。依从性因调查类型而异,且未宣布的奖金激励措施并未影响依从率。参与者在赢得礼品卡后的那一周完成的调查较少。我们为未来EMA研究的设计提供了建议。