Shiffman S, Hufford M, Hickcox M, Paty J A, Gnys M, Kassel J D
University of Pittsburgh, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania 15260, USA.
J Consult Clin Psychol. 1997 Apr;65(2):292-300. doi: 10.1037/0022-006x.65.2.292.a.
Research and treatment assessments often rely on retrospective recall of events. The accuracy of recall was tested using accounts of smoking lapse episodes from 127 participants who had quit smoking, and lapses and temptations were recorded in near-real time using a hand-held computer. These computer records were compared with retrospective accounts elicited 12 weeks later, with a focus on recall of lapses in 4 content domains: mood, activity, episode Triggers, and abstinence violation effects. Recall of lapses was quite poor: Average kappas for items ranged from 0.18 to 0.27. Mean profile rs assessing recall for the overall pattern of behavior were .36, .30, .33, and .44 for these domains, respectively. In recall, participants overestimated their negative affect and the number of cigarettes they had smoked during the lapse, and their recall was influenced by current smoking status. The findings suggest caution in the use of recall in research and intervention.
研究和治疗评估常常依赖于对事件的回顾性回忆。通过127名戒烟者关于吸烟复吸事件的描述来测试回忆的准确性,并使用手持计算机近乎实时地记录复吸和诱惑情况。将这些计算机记录与12周后得到的回顾性描述进行比较,重点关注4个内容领域中复吸的回忆情况:情绪、活动、事件触发因素和违反戒烟效应。对复吸的回忆相当不准确:各项目的平均卡帕值在0.18至0.27之间。评估这些领域中行为总体模式回忆情况的平均轮廓相关系数分别为0.36、0.30、0.33和0.44。在回忆中,参与者高估了他们的负面影响以及复吸期间所吸香烟的数量,并且他们的回忆受到当前吸烟状况的影响。研究结果表明在研究和干预中使用回忆时应谨慎。