Revisiting the lack of association between affect and physiology: Contrasting between-person and within-person analyses.

Momentary mood predicts upcoming real‐life sedentary behavior

“…For instance, Maher et al 36 found that physical behavior (ie, physical activity and sedentary behavior) was associated with satisfaction with life on a within-subject level, but not on a between-subject level. Similar results were found by Zawadzki et al 37 showing that self-reported anger and objective blood pressure were associated on a within-subject level, but not on a between-subject level. In the same manner, our study adds first evidence that mood is associated with sedentary behavior on a within-subject level but not on a between-subject level.…”

Relationships between incidental physical activity, exercise, and sports with subsequent mood in adolescents

“…Additionally, some definitions imply sports are executed for internal or external rewards and require complex physical skills. 9 To garner insights into how physical activity (ie incidental activity, exercise and sports) relates to mood in adolescents, intensive longitudinal data are crucial, since within-subject processes (derived from intensive longitudinal data) are conceptually, 11 methodologically, 11 and empirically 10 distinct from between-subject relationships (derived from cross-sectional data). One striking example that emphasizes the importance of this distinction is that people with generally higher physical activity levels showed habitually lower blood pressure (ie a negative between-subject correlation), but current higher physical activity coincided with higher blood pressure in everyday life, for example, when climbing stairs (ie a positive within-subject correlation).…”

Neuroticism, rumination, negative affect, and sleep: Examining between- and within-person associations

“…Both approaches are useful, but answer very different questions: Between-person analyses can identify individuals at greatest risk for adverse sleep outcomes (e.g., those higher in trait neuroticism), whereas within-person analyses can identify specific daily processes related to sleep (e.g., days characterized by more rumination or NA than average). The separation of between- and within-person effects helps avoid the ecological fallacy, where inferences about associations at one level of analysis (e.g., day-level characteristics) are conflated with associations at another level of analysis (e.g., person-level characteristics; Kramer, 1983; Zawadzki, Smyth, Sliwinski, Ruiz, & Gerin, 2017).…”