Studies // Cited work
Ambulatory assessment
Trull, T. J., & Ebner-Priemer, U. (2013). Ambulatory assessment.
Level D Review doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050212-185510
What this study supports
Supports the claims that ambulatory assessment collects self-report, observational and physiological data in natural environments, minimises retrospective bias with ecologically valid data, and raises acceptability, compliance, privacy and ethical issues. Methods review, not evidence about any emotion category.
- Who was studied
- Not applicable: a review of ambulatory assessment methods and their applications in clinical psychology.
- Design
- Review
- Level of evidence
- Cross-sectional, observational, qualitative work and narrative reviews.
Claims that rest on it
Each claim states what the site asserts, at what strength, and with what caveat.
TechnicalLevel DConfidence HIGH
Ambulatory assessment reduces retrospective bias and gains ecological validity, but physiological signs of emotion in daily life can be masked by social engagement, mental and physical workload, food intake and circadian and metabolic variation, and such monitoring raises acceptability, compliance, privacy and ethical issues.
- Scope
- Measurement of emotion outside the laboratory.
- Caveat
- Methodological reviews: they describe what must be controlled, not how large each confound is.
Last reviewed · Review due · measuring-field-recordings-confounded