scholarly journals Positive and negative affect in the daily life of world trade center responders with PTSD: An ecological momentary assessment study.

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allison Dornbach-Bender ◽  
Camilo J. Ruggero ◽  
Keke Schuler ◽  
Ateka A. Contractor ◽  
Monika Waszczuk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Negative Affect ◽  
Ecological Momentary Assessment ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Daily Life ◽  
World Trade Center ◽  
Positive And Negative Affect ◽  
Assessment Study ◽  
Trade Center ◽  
Ecological Momentary ◽  
Momentary Assessment

Positive and negative affect following marijuana use in naturalistic settings: An ecological momentary assessment study

2018 ◽  
Vol 76 ◽  
pp. 61-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig S. Ross ◽  
Daniel R. Brooks ◽  
Ann Aschengrau ◽  
Michael B. Siegel ◽  
Janice Weinberg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Negative Affect ◽  
Ecological Momentary Assessment ◽  
Marijuana Use ◽  
Positive And Negative Affect ◽  
Assessment Study ◽  
Ecological Momentary ◽  
Momentary Assessment

scholarly journals A Coordinated Analysis of Variance in Affect in Daily Life

Assessment ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (8) ◽  
pp. 1683-1698 ◽  
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.

A-111 Ecological Momentary Assessment of Mood after Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 1160-1160
Author(s):  
Julianne Wilson ◽  
Amanda R Rabinowitz ◽  
Tessa Hart
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Negative Affect ◽  
Severe Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Ecological Momentary Assessment ◽  
Community Dwelling ◽  
Positive And Negative Affect ◽  
Environmental Reward ◽  
Ecological Momentary ◽  
Momentary Assessment

Abstract Objective In persons with moderate–severe traumatic brain injury (msTBI), we compared traditional measures of mood with dynamic measures of affect derived from ecological momentary assessment (EMA), for the purpose of validating the EMA indices and exploring their unique contributions to emotional assessment. Method 23 community-dwelling participants with chronic msTBI were enrolled in a treatment trial for anxiety and/ or depression. At baseline, participants completed the Brief Symptom Inventory-18 Depression and Anxiety subscales (BSI-D, BSI-A) and the Environmental Reward Observation Scale (EROS), a measure of everyday pleasure and reward. EMA data, including the Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS), were collected via smartphone 5 times daily for 7–14 days prior to treatment (M = 8.65; SD = 1.87). Spearman correlations tested associations between baseline BSI-D, BSI-A, and EROS scores with both overall means and temporal variability measures for positive and negative affect (PA, NA). Results Mean PA was significantly correlated with BSI-D (rho −0.60, p < 0.05) and EROS (rho 0.72, p < 0.01). Mean NA and affect variability measures were uncorrelated with baseline scores. NA mean and variability were intercorrelated (rho 0.87, p < 0.001), but this was not the case for PA. Conclusion EMA measures of averaged positive affect showed robust relationships with retrospective measures of depression and environmental reward, providing support for the validity of EMA measures of PA, and for use of the EROS in msTBI. While negative findings must be interpreted with caution, the lack of association of affective variability with retrospective measures suggest a unique role for EMA in examining temporal dynamics of affect.

scholarly journals Increases of negative affect following daily hassles are not moderated by neuroticism: An ecological momentary assessment study

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (5) ◽  
pp. 615-628
Author(s):  
Lara Kristin Mey ◽  
Andrea Chmitorz ◽  
Karolina Kurth ◽  
Mario Wenzel ◽  
Raffael Kalisch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Negative Affect ◽  
Ecological Momentary Assessment ◽  
Daily Hassles ◽  
Assessment Study ◽  
Ecological Momentary ◽  
Momentary Assessment
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document