Considering the 'With Whom': Differences Between Event- and Signal-Contingent ESM Data of Person-Specific Social Interactions

Experience sampling studies often aim to capture social interactions. A central methodological question in such studies is whether to use event- or signal-contingent sampling. The little existing research on this issue has not taken into account that social interactions occur with unique interaction...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Multivariate behavioral research 2024-07, Vol.59 (4), p.841-858
Main Authors: Stadel, Marie, van Duijn, Marijtje A. J., Wright, Aidan G. C., Bringmann, Laura F., Elmer, Timon
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adolescent
ambulatory assessment
College students
Colleges & universities
Ecological Momentary Assessment
experience sampling methodology
Female
Humans
Interpersonal Relations
Male
Sampling
Sampling designs
social context
Social Interaction
social interactions
Students - psychology
Students - statistics & numerical data
Variance analysis
Young Adult
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Experience sampling studies often aim to capture social interactions. A central methodological question in such studies is whether to use event- or signal-contingent sampling. The little existing research on this issue has not taken into account that social interactions occur with unique interaction partners (e.g., Anna or Tom). We analyze one week of social interaction data of 286 students from the University of Pittsburgh (60.8% male, mean age 19.2 years), taking into account the unique interaction partners of each student. Specifically, we investigate the differences between event- and signal contingent sampling in (1) the total number of unique interaction partners captured, as well as (2) the kinds of relationships, and (3) the quality of social interactions with these captured interaction partners. Apart from a larger quantity of interactions and unique interaction partners in the event-contingent sampling design, our analyses indicate subtle differences between the two designs when aiming to assess social interactions with more distant interaction partners, such as coworkers or strangers. Most importantly, in our analyses, specific interaction partners and social roles explained a considerable amount of variance in the quality of social interactions (up to 20.5%), suggesting that future research would benefit greatly from considering "with whom" individuals interact.
ISSN:0027-3171
1532-7906
1532-7906
DOI:10.1080/00273171.2024.2335405