Cultural differences in stress and affection following social support receipt

Culturally appropriate social support predicts better psychological outcomes. Motivation for providing social support may vary cross-culturally, with more independent cultures valuing self-esteem and more interdependent cultures valuing closeness. Participants in the U.S. (N = 85) and Singapore (N = 78) reported on emotions and social support receipt using the Day Reconstruction Method. We examined cultural differences in stress and affection, and tested country as a moderator of the associations between both social support receipt and social support motivation, and next-episode emotions. Multilevel modeling analyses showed that not only did the emotional correlates of social support receipt vary by country, but that recipient perceptions of esteem-building and closeness-fostering SS also differentially correlated with subsequent emotion. For example, esteem-building SS predicted greater next-episode stress for Singaporean participants, but less stress in the U.S. Esteem-building SS predicted more next-episode affection only in the U.S. Culturally appropriate social support predicts positive psychological outcomes. This research highlights the importance of considering culture when examining the dynamic emotional correlates of social support receipt.

Difference in mood at work and home. An additional indicator of job satisfaction

New techniques for multiple moment assessment allow us to assess how people feel at different times of the day. These techniques are mostly used to assess how well people feel during particular activities, such as during work or childcare. In this paper we focus on the difference in how well people feel at work and at home. The following questions are addressed: 1) How large is the difference in mood at work and at home? 2) How much does the difference in mood at work and at home vary across kinds of people and occupations? 3) Is the difference in mood at work and at home associated with job satisfaction as measured using common general retrospective ratings or does it tap another aspect of job satisfaction? We explore answers to these questions, using data from a diary study in the Netherlands, done using an e-application of the Day Reconstruction Method (DRM) in which 1,410 people provided information about mood experienced in 32,000 episodes. We found that the average difference in mood at work and at home is small in this sample but that it varies across people and occupations. We found a low correlation of the difference in mood with the respondent’s retrospective ratings of their general job satisfaction, which suggests that there is more in the phenomena of job satisfaction than is measured using the usual questions on general job satisfaction. This, as yet unrecognized, aspect of job satisfaction is likely to add to information demands behind common measurements of job satisfaction, that is, to indicate the quality of the work conditions and estimate chances to improve worker performance and reduce turnover by making work more satisfying. We suggest an agenda for research in these areas of possible gains.

The Journey from Episode to Evaluation: How Travelers Arrive at Summary Evaluations

Understanding how travelers evaluate their overall trip experience is important to travel research. Psychologists suggested that these retrospective evaluations are often made by temporally integrating multiple episodes following simple heuristics that draw on key episodes only, typically the peak and end episodes, rather than considering every episodic evaluation, weighted by its respective duration. To test these aggregation rules, a survey adapting the Day Reconstruction Method was conducted in 2017 among 691 travelers to Macau. Our findings reveal that summary evaluations are better predicted using an arithmetic average of all episodic evaluations, instead of the peak-end rule. This may be explained by the lengthier and more complex nature of travel, compared with other extended experiences that psychologists have investigated. The immediate theoretical implications are that (1) aggregate trip evaluations are influenced by most episodes, and (2) the relative duration of individual episodes is disregarded. Theoretical, methodological, and practical implications are discussed.

Time well spent versus a life considered: changing subjective Well-Being in China

Using unique longitudinal survey data that employed the Day Reconstruction Method to measure experienced utility (EU) in rural China, this study reveals striking differences in the trends for life satisfaction and EU. We find that reported life satisfaction changed little over the period from 2006 to 2009. However, EU increased significantly during the same period. The improvement in EU is mainly due to more positive feelings about specific activities rather than changes in the time spent on different activities. These findings are consistent with the predictions of aspiration adaptation theory.

Comparability of Emotion Dynamics Derived From Ecological Momentary Assessments, Daily Diaries, and the Day Reconstruction Method: Observational Study

Background Interest in the measurement of the temporal dynamics of people’s emotional lives has risen substantially in psychological and medical research. Emotions fluctuate and change over time, and measuring the ebb and flow of people’s affective experiences promises enhanced insights into people’s health and functioning. Researchers have used a variety of intensive longitudinal assessment (ILA) methods to create measures of emotion dynamics, including ecological momentary assessments (EMAs), end-of-day (EOD) diaries, and the day reconstruction method (DRM). To date, it is unclear whether they can be used interchangeably or whether ostensibly similar emotion dynamics captured by the methods differ in meaningful ways. Objective This study aims to examine the extent to which different ILA methods yield comparable measures of intraindividual emotion dynamics. Methods Data from 90 participants aged 50 years or older were collected in a probability-based internet panel, the Understanding America Study, and analyzed. Participants provided positive and negative affect ratings using 3 ILA methods: (1) smartphone-based EMA, administered 6 times per day over 1 week, (2) web-based EOD diaries, administered daily over the same week, and (3) web-based DRM, administered once during that week. We calculated 11 measures of emotion dynamics (addressing mean levels, variability, instability, and inertia separately for positive and negative affect, as well as emotion network density, mixed emotions, and emotional dialecticism) from each ILA method. The analyses examined mean differences and correlations of scores addressing the same emotion dynamic across the ILA methods. We also compared the patterns of intercorrelations among the emotion dynamics and their relationships with health outcomes (general health, pain, and fatigue) across ILA methods. Results Emotion dynamics derived from EMAs and EOD diaries demonstrated moderate-to-high correspondence for measures of mean emotion levels (ρ≥0.95), variability (ρ≥0.68), instability (ρ≥0.51), mixed emotions (ρ=0.92), and emotional dialecticism (ρ=0.57), and low correspondence for measures of inertia (ρ≥0.17) and emotion network density (ρ=0.36). DRM-derived measures showed correlations with EMAs and EOD diaries that were high for mean emotion levels and mixed emotions (ρ≥0.74), moderate for variability (ρ=0.38-.054), and low to moderate for other measures (ρ=0.03-0.41). Intercorrelations among the emotion dynamics showed high convergence across EMAs and EOD diaries, and moderate convergence between the DRM and EMAs as well as EOD diaries. Emotion dynamics from all 3 ILA methods produced very similar patterns of relationships with health outcomes. Conclusions EMAs and EOD diaries provide corresponding information about individual differences in various emotion dynamics, whereas the DRM provides corresponding information about emotion levels and (to a lesser extent) variability, but not about more complex emotion dynamics. Our results caution researchers against viewing these ILA methods as universally interchangeable.

Comparability of Emotion Dynamics Derived From Ecological Momentary Assessments, Daily Diaries, and the Day Reconstruction Method: Observational Study (Preprint)

BACKGROUND Interest in the measurement of the temporal dynamics of people’s emotional lives has risen substantially in psychological and medical research. Emotions fluctuate and change over time, and measuring the ebb and flow of people’s affective experiences promises enhanced insights into people’s health and functioning. Researchers have used a variety of intensive longitudinal assessment (ILA) methods to create measures of emotion dynamics, including ecological momentary assessments (EMAs), end-of-day (EOD) diaries, and the day reconstruction method (DRM). To date, it is unclear whether they can be used interchangeably or whether ostensibly similar emotion dynamics captured by the methods differ in meaningful ways. OBJECTIVE This study aims to examine the extent to which different ILA methods yield comparable measures of intraindividual emotion dynamics. METHODS Data from 90 participants aged 50 years or older were collected in a probability-based internet panel, the Understanding America Study, and analyzed. Participants provided positive and negative affect ratings using 3 ILA methods: (1) smartphone-based EMA, administered 6 times per day over 1 week, (2) web-based EOD diaries, administered daily over the same week, and (3) web-based DRM, administered once during that week. We calculated 11 measures of emotion dynamics (addressing mean levels, variability, instability, and inertia separately for positive and negative affect, as well as emotion network density, mixed emotions, and emotional dialecticism) from each ILA method. The analyses examined mean differences and correlations of scores addressing the same emotion dynamic across the ILA methods. We also compared the patterns of intercorrelations among the emotion dynamics and their relationships with health outcomes (general health, pain, and fatigue) across ILA methods. RESULTS Emotion dynamics derived from EMAs and EOD diaries demonstrated moderate-to-high correspondence for measures of mean emotion levels (ρ≥0.95), variability (ρ≥0.68), instability (ρ≥0.51), mixed emotions (ρ=0.92), and emotional dialecticism (ρ=0.57), and low correspondence for measures of inertia (ρ≥0.17) and emotion network density (ρ=0.36). DRM-derived measures showed correlations with EMAs and EOD diaries that were high for mean emotion levels and mixed emotions (ρ≥0.74), moderate for variability (ρ=0.38-.054), and low to moderate for other measures (ρ=0.03-0.41). Intercorrelations among the emotion dynamics showed high convergence across EMAs and EOD diaries, and moderate convergence between the DRM and EMAs as well as EOD diaries. Emotion dynamics from all 3 ILA methods produced very similar patterns of relationships with health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS EMAs and EOD diaries provide corresponding information about individual differences in various emotion dynamics, whereas the DRM provides corresponding information about emotion levels and (to a lesser extent) variability, but not about more complex emotion dynamics. Our results caution researchers against viewing these ILA methods as universally interchangeable.

A Direct Comparison of the Day Reconstruction Method and the Experience Sampling Method

The Day Reconstruction Method (DRM) is an approach to measuring well-being that is designed to approximate the rich data that can be obtained from intensive repeated measures designs like those used in the Experience Sampling Method (ESM). Although some preliminary tests of the validity of the DRM have been conducted, these typically focus on agreement between the two methods at very broad levels, rather than focusing on whether the two methods provide similar information at a moment-to-moment level. This paper reports two studies that use ESM and DRM to assess the same moments. Agreement between the two measures varied considerably depending on the focus of the analysis. For aggregate assessments of total time spent in situations and average affect in situations, agreement was high; for between-person differences in time use and experienced affect, agreement varied across situations; and for within-person differences in both situations and affect, agreement was quite low. In addition, we found preliminary evidence that the DRM may be more influenced by expectations regarding the pleasantness of situations as compared to ESM. These results suggest that for many common purposes, the DRM does not provide the same information as ESM.