An Empirical Analysis of the Obtrusiveness of and Participants' Compliance with the Electronically Activated Recorder (EAR)
Abstract
Abstract. In this article, the authors provide an empirical analysis of the obtrusiveness of and participants' compliance with a relatively new psychological ambulatory assessment method, called the electronically activated recorder or EAR. The EAR is a modified portable audio-recorder that periodically records snippets of ambient sounds from participants' daily environments. In tracking moment-to-moment ambient sounds, the EAR yields an acoustic log of a person's day as it unfolds. As a naturalistic observation sampling method, it provides an observer's account of daily life and is optimized for the assessment of audible aspects of participants' naturally-occurring social behaviors and interactions. Measures of self-reported and behaviorally-assessed EAR obtrusiveness and compliance were analyzed in two samples. After an initial 2-h period of relative obtrusiveness, participants habituated to wearing the EAR and perceived it as fairly unobtrusive both in a short-term (2 days, N = 96) and a longer-term (10-11 days, N = 11) monitoring. Compliance with the method was high both during the short-term and longer-term monitoring. Somewhat reduced compliance was identified over the weekend; this effect appears to be specific to student populations. Important privacy and data confidentiality considerations around the EAR method are discussed.
References
Barker, R.G. Wright, H.F. (1951). One boy's day. A specimen record of behavior . New York: Harper & BrothersBochner, S. (1979). Designing unobtrusive field experiments in social psychology. In L. Sechrest (Ed.), Unobtrusive measurement today. San Francisco: Jossey-BassBolger, N. Davis, A. Rafaeli, E. (2003). Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 579– 616Christensen, A. Hazzard, A. (1983). Reactive effects during naturalistic observations of families. Behavioral Assessment, 5, 349– 362Craik, K.H. (2000). The lived day of an individual: A person-environment perspective. In W.B. Walsh, K.H. Craik, & R.H. Price (Eds.), Person-environment psychology: New directions and perspectives (pp. 233-266). Mahwah, NJ: ErlbaumEbner-Priemer, U.W. Ed. (2006). Junge Forscher im Feld - neue Perspektiven des ambulanten psychophysiologischen Monitoring . [Young scientists in the field-New perspectives in ambulatory psychophysiological monitoring]. Frankfurt: Peter LangEid, M. Diener, E. Eds. (2005). Handbook of multimethod measurement in psychology . Washington, DC: American Psychological AssociationFahrenberg, J. Myrtek, M. Eds. (2001). Progress in ambulatory assessment . Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & HuberFahrenberg, J. Myrtek, M. Pawlik, K. Perrez, M. (2007a). Ambulatory assessment - monitoring behavior in daily life settings: A behavioral-scientific challenge for psychology. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23, 206– 213Fritsche, I. Linneweber, V. (2006). Nonreactive methods in psychological research. In M. Eid & E. Diener (Eds.), Handbook of multimethod measurement in psychology (pp. 189-203). Washington, DC: APAGoodwin, M.W. Velicer, W.F. Intille, S.S. (in press). Telemetric monitoring in the behavioral sciences. Behavior Research Methods,Green, A.S. Rafaeli, E. Bolger, N. Shrout, P.E. Reis, H.T. (2006). Paper or plastic? Data equivalence in paper and electronic diaries. Psychological Methods, 11, 87– 105Kazdin, A.E. (2006). Arbitrary metrics: Implications for identifying evidence-based treatments. American Psychologist, 61, 42– 49Kerig, P.K. Baucom, D.H. Eds. (2004). Couple observational coding systems . Mahwah, NJ: ErlbaumMehl, M.R. (2005). Quantitative text analysis. In M. Eid & E. Diener (Eds.), Handbook of multimethod measurement in psychology (pp. 141-156). Washington, DC: American Psychological AssociationMehl, M.R. (2006). The lay assessment of subclinical depression in daily life. Psychological Assessment, 18, 340– 345Mehl, M.R. Gosling, S.D. Pennebaker, J.W. (2006). Personality in its natural habitat: Manifestations and implicit folk theories of personality in daily life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 862– 877Mehl, M.R. Pennebaker, J.W. (2003a). The social dynamics of a cultural upheaval: Social interactions surrounding September 11, 2001. Psychological Science, 14, 579– 585Mehl, M.R. Pennebaker, J.W. (2003b). The sounds of social life: A psychometric analysis of students' daily social environments and natural conversations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 857– 870Mehl, M.R. Pennebaker, J.W. Crow, M. Dabbs, J. Price, J. (2001). The electronically activated recorder (EAR): A device for sampling naturalistic daily activities and conversations. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 33, 517– 523Mehl, M.R. Vazire, S. Ramírez-Esparza, N. Slatcher, R.B. Pennebaker, J.W. (2007). Are women really more talkative than men?. Science, 317, 82–Paulhus, D.L. Vazire, S. (2007). Self-report methods. In R.W. Robins, R.C. Fraley, & R. Krueger (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in personality psychology (pp. 224-239). New York: GuilfordPerrez, M. Schoebi, D. Wilhelm, P. (2000). How to assess social regulation of stress and emotions in daily family life? A computer-assisted family self-monitoring system (FASEM-C). Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 7, 326– 339Piasecki, T.M. Hufford, M.R. Solhan, M. Trull, T.J. (2007). Assessing clients in their natural environments with electronic diaries: Rationale, benefits, limitations, and barriers. Psychological Assessment, 19, 25– 43Ramírez-Esparza, N. Mehl, M.R. Alvarez Bermúdez, J. Pennebaker, J.W. (2007). Are Mexicans more sociable than Americans? Insights from a naturalistic observation study . Manuscript under reviewSillars, A.L. (1991). Behavioral observation. In B. Montgomery & S. Duck (Eds.), Studying interpersonal interaction. New York: GuilfordStone, A.A. Shiffman, S.S. Atienza, A. Nebeling, L. Eds. (2007). The science of real-time data capture: Self-reports in health research . New York: Oxford University PressStone, A.A. Shiffman, S. Schwartz, J. Broderick, J.E. Hufford, M.R. (2003). Patient compliance with electronic and paper diaries. Controlled Clinical Trials, 24, 182– 199Takarangi, M.K.T. Garry, M. Loftus, E.F. (2006). Dear diary, is plastic better than paper? I can't remember. Psychological Methods, 11, 119– 122Wilhelm, P. Perrez, M. (2004). How is my partner feeling in different daily-life settings? Accuracy of spouses' judgments about their partner's feelings at work and at home.. Social Indicators Research, 67(1-2), 183– 246
