Considering the ’With Whom’: Differences between event- and signal-contingent ESM data of person-specific social interactions.

Abstract

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 few existing studies on this issue have not taken into account that social interactions occur with specific interaction partners who have a unique relationship with the participant. We analyze data on social interactions of students to investigate the differences between the two sampling designs in (1) the number of captured interaction partners, (2) the characteristics of captured interaction partners, and (3) the quality of interactions taking into account that they take place with specific interaction partners. Apart from a larger quantity ofinteractions and interaction partners captured with event-contingent sampling, our analyses indicate subtle differences between the designs. They further highlight that the social role of an interaction partner explains a considerable proportion of variance (up to 20.5%) in perceived social support and interaction quality.

Lonely but not alone: Loneliness and social positive valence sensitivity in emerging adults' everyday lives

“…A strength of the current study is that it operationalizes different aspects of social PVS sensitivity with complementary self-reported trait and EMA methods. However, EMA of positive and negative social experiences is also impacted by the extent to which participants' environments afforded opportunities for such experiences to take place and the kinds of relationships they share with those around them (Stadel et al, 2022). As such, objective assessment of participants' environments remains limited.…”

Modeling categorical time-to-event data: The example of social interaction dynamics captured with event-contingent experience sampling methods.

“…We find, for example, that in periods where individuals report a higher affect valence than they usual do, subsequent interactions are expected to happen sooner with family members and friends, than with romantic partners, coworkers, or strangers. Thus, when investigating social interaction dynamics, it is important to take into account with whom individuals are interacting (Stadel et al, 2022), as the dynamics might differ between types of interaction partners.…”

So you want to do ESM? Ten Essential Topics for Implementing the Experience Sampling Method (ESM)

“…In these schemes, assessments are initiated by prompts (Himmelstein et al, 2019). In contrast, event-contingent schemes consist of assessments that take place whenever the event of interest happens (e.g., social interactions; Dawood et al, 2020;Himmelstein et al, 2019;Stadel et al, 2023), that is, assessments are typically initiated by the study participants. It is also important to note that most sampling scheme choices have both advantages and disadvantages.…”

“…It is also important to note that most sampling scheme choices have both advantages and disadvantages. Consider social interactions as an example: An eventcontingent scheme may be advantageous because it aids ecological validity particularly well and may provide more fine-grained insights, but it also relies on participants to not forget to report relevant social interactions (e.g., Himmelstein et al, 2019;Stadel et al, 2023). On the other hand, fixed or (semi-)random schemes may be advantageous because they ensure a sufficient number of assessments, but they rely more heavily on (retrospective) memory recall of the relevant social interactions than event-contingent schemes (e.g., Himmelstein et al, 2019;Stadel et al, 2023).…”