Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 7-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Clinical Assessment of Affective Instability: Comparing EMA Indices, Questionnaire Reports, and Retrospective Recall

Clinical Assessment of Affective Instability: Comparing EMA Indices, Questionnaire Reports, and... Traditional self-report measures of psychopathology may be influenced by a variety of recall biases. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) reduces these biases by assessing individuals’ experiences as they occur in their natural environments. This study examines the discrepancy between trait questionnaire, retrospective report, and EMA measures of affective instability in psychiatric outpatients either with a borderline personality diagnosis (n = 58) or with a current episode of major depressive disorder or dysthymia (n = 42). The authors examined the agreement of 3 trait measures of affective instability—the Affective Instability subscale of the Personality Assessment Inventory–Borderline Features scale (L. C. Morey, 1991), the Affect Intensity Measure (R. J. Larsen, E. Diener, & R. Emmons, 1986), and the Affect Lability Scales (P. D. Harvey, B. R. Greenberg, & M. R. Serper, 1989)—and 1 retrospective mood recall task with EMA indices of mood and mood instability. Results indicate only modest to moderate agreement between momentary and questionnaire assessments of trait affective instability; agreement between recalled mood changes and EMA indices was poor. Implications for clinical research and practice and possible applications of EMA methodology are discussed. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Psychological Assessment American Psychological Association

Clinical Assessment of Affective Instability: Comparing EMA Indices, Questionnaire Reports, and Retrospective Recall

Download PDF
12 pages

 
/lp/american-psychological-association/clinical-assessment-of-affective-instability-comparing-ema-indices-I60hg80Lq5

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
American Psychological Association
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 American Psychological Association
ISSN
1040-3590
eISSN
1939-134X
DOI
10.1037/a0016869
pmid
19719353
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Traditional self-report measures of psychopathology may be influenced by a variety of recall biases. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) reduces these biases by assessing individuals’ experiences as they occur in their natural environments. This study examines the discrepancy between trait questionnaire, retrospective report, and EMA measures of affective instability in psychiatric outpatients either with a borderline personality diagnosis (n = 58) or with a current episode of major depressive disorder or dysthymia (n = 42). The authors examined the agreement of 3 trait measures of affective instability—the Affective Instability subscale of the Personality Assessment Inventory–Borderline Features scale (L. C. Morey, 1991), the Affect Intensity Measure (R. J. Larsen, E. Diener, & R. Emmons, 1986), and the Affect Lability Scales (P. D. Harvey, B. R. Greenberg, & M. R. Serper, 1989)—and 1 retrospective mood recall task with EMA indices of mood and mood instability. Results indicate only modest to moderate agreement between momentary and questionnaire assessments of trait affective instability; agreement between recalled mood changes and EMA indices was poor. Implications for clinical research and practice and possible applications of EMA methodology are discussed.

Journal

Psychological Assessment – American Psychological Association

Published: Sep 1, 2009

There are no references for this article.