Ambulatory assessment - Capturing behavior in daily life. A behavioral science approach to psychology;Ambulantes Assessment-Verhalten im Alltagskontext Erfassen: Eine Verhaltenswissenschaftliche Herausforderung an die Psychologie

Psychologische Rundschau

Volumn 58, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 12-23

  Fahrenberg, Jochen ^a   Myrtek, Michael ^a   Pawlik, Kurt ^b   Perrez, Meinrad ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HAMBURG   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF FRIBOURG   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Ambulatory assessment (monitoring); Computer assisted methods; Decade of behavior; Ecological validity; Electronic diary

Indexed keywords

EID: 34249899382     PISSN: 00333042     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1026/0033-3042.58.1.12     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. American Psychological Association (1999). 'Decade of Behavior' moves forward. APA MONITOR Online, 30 (3). http://www.decadeofbehavior.org/ index.cfm
2. Barker, R. G. & Wright, H. F. (1951). One boy 's day. A specimen record of behavior. New York: Harper & Bros.
3. Barrett, L. F. & Barrett, D. J. (2001). An introduction to computerized experience sampling in psychology. Social Science Computer Review, 19, 175-185.
4. Bolger, N., Zuckerman, A. & Kessler, R. C. (2000). Invisible support and adjustment to stress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 953-961.
5. Bühler, K. (1927). Die Krise der Psychologie. Jena: Fischer.
6. Buse, L. & Pawlik, K. (1984). Inter-Setting-Korrelationen und Setting-Persönlichkeit-Wechselwirkungen: Ergebnisse einer Felduntersuchung zur Konsistenz von Verhalten und Erleben. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 15, 44-59.
7. Buse, L. & Pawlik, K. (1996). Ambulatory behavioral assessment and in-field psychological testing. In J. Fahrenberg & M. Myrtek (Eds.), Ambulatory assessment: Computer-assisted psychological and psychophysiological methods in monitoring and field studies (pp. 29-50). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe and Huber.
8. Bussmann, H. (1998). Ambulatory monitoring of mobility-related activities in rehabilitation medicine. Delft, The Netherlands: Eburon.
9. Cohen, G. (1991). Memory in the real world. East Sussex: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10. Cohen, G. & Java, R. (1995). Memory for medical history. Accuracy of recall. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 273-288.
11. Csikszentmihalyi, M. & Larson, R. (1987). Validity and reliability of the experience-sampling method. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 175, 526-536.
12. Ebner-Priemer, U. W. (Hrsg.). (2006). Ambulantes psychophysiologisches Monitoring - neue Perspektiven und Anwendungen. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
13. Eid, M. & Diener, E. (1999). Intraindividual variability in affect: Reliability, validity, and personality correlates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 662-676.
14. Endler, N. S. & Hunt, J. McV. (1968). S-R inventories of hostility and comparisons of the proportions of variance for persons, responses, and situations for hostility and anxiousness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 309-315.
15. Endler, N. S. & Magnusson, D. ( 1976). Toward an interactional psychology of personality. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 956-974.
16. European Network for Ambulatory Assessment. Available at http://www.ambulatory-assessment.org.
17. Fahrenberg, J. (2006). Assessment in daily life. A review of computer-assisted methodologies and applications in psychology and psychophysiology, years 2000-2005. Available at http://www.ambulatory- assessment.org/.
18. Fahrenberg, J., Leonhart, R. & Foerster, F. (2002). Alltagsnahe Psychologie mit hand-held PC und physiologischem Mess-System. Bern: Huber.
19. Fahrenberg, J. & Myrtek, M. (Eds.) (1996). Ambulatory assessment: Computer-assisted psychological and psychophysiological methods in monitoring and field studies. Seattle, WA: Hogrefe and Huber.
20. Fahrenberg, J. & Myrtek, M. (Eds.). (2001 a). Progress in ambulatory assessment: Computer-assisted psychological and psychophysiological methods in monitoring and field studies. Seattle, WA : Hogrefe and Huber.
21. Fahrenberg, J. & Myrtek, M. (2001 b). Ambulantes Monitoring und Assessment. In F. Rösler (Hrsg.), Enzyklopädie der Psychologie: Themenbereich C Theorie und Forschung, Serie 1 Biologische Psychologie, Band 4 Grundlagen und Methoden der Psychophysiologie (S. 657-798). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
22. Fahrenberg, J. & Myrtek, M. (2005). Psychophysiologie in Labor, Klinik und Alltag. 40 Jahre Projektarbeit der Freiburger Forschungsgruppe Psychophysiologie - Kommentare und Neue Perspektiven. Frankfurt: Lang.
23. Foerster, F. & Fahrenberg, J. (2000). Motion pattern and posture: Correctly assessed by calibrated accelerometers. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 32, 450-457.
24. Hektner, J. M. & Csikszentmihalyi, M, (2002). The Experience Sampling Method: Measuring the context and content of lives, In R. B. Bechtel & A. Churchman (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology (pp. 233-243). New York: Wiley.
25. Hundleby, J. D., Pawlik, K. & Cattell, R. B. (1965). Personality factors in objective test devices. San Diego, CA: Knapp.
26. Käppler, C., Brügner, G. & Fahrenberg, J. (2001). Pocketcomputer-unterstütztes Assessment mit MONITOR: Befindlichkeit im Alltag, Methodenakzeptanz und die Replikation des Retrospektionseffektes. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 22, 249-266.
27. Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D. A., Schwarz, N. & Stone, A. A. (2004). A survey method for characterizing daily life experience: The day reconstruction method. Science, 306, 1776-1780.
28. Larsen, R. J. & Kasimatis, M. (1990). Individual differences in entrainment of mood to the weekly calendar. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 164-171.
29. Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. New York: Harper and Brothers.
30. Magnusson, D. (1980). Personality in an interactional paradigm of research. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 1, 11-34.
31. Michel, G. (in Druck). Daily patterns of symptom reporting in families with adolescent children. British Journal of Health Psychology.
32. Mischel, W. (1969). Continuity and change in personality. American Psychologist, 24, 1012-1018.
33. Myrtek, M. (2004). Heart and emotion. Ambulatory monitoring studies in everyday life. Cambridge, MA: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.
34. Myrtek, M., Brügner, G., Fichtler, A., König, K., Müller, W., Foerster, F. & Höppner, V. (1988). Detection of emotionally induced ECG changes and their behavioral correlates: A new method for ambulatory monitoring. European Heart Journal, 9 (Supplement N), 55-60.
35. Myrtek, M., Foerster, F. & Brügner, G. (2001). Freiburger Monitoring System (FMS). Ein Daten-Aufnahme- und Auswertungssystem für Untersuchungen im Alltag: Emotionale Beanspruchung, Körperlage, Bewegung, EKG, subjektives Befinden, Verhalten. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
36. Myrtek, M. & Scharff, C. (2000). Fernsehen, Schule und Verhalten. Untersuchungen zur emotionalen Beanspruchung von Schülern. Bern: Huber.
37. Parati, G. & Mancia, G. (2006). Assessing the white-coat effect: which blood pressure measurement should be considered? Journal of Hypertension, 24, 29-31.
38. Parshall, C. G., Spray, J. A., Kalohn, J. C. & Davey, T. (2002), Practical considerations in computer-based testing. New York: Springer.
39. Patry, J.-L. (Hrsg.) (1982). Feldforschung. Bern: Hans Huber.
40. Pawlik, K. (1988). "Naturalistische" Daten für Psychodiagnostik: Zur Methodik psychodiagnostischer Felderhebungen. Zeitschrift fur Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 9, 169-181.
41. Pawlik, K. (2006). Objektive Tests in der Persönlichkeitsforschung. In T. M.Ortner, R. T. Proyer & K. D. Kubinger (Hrsg.), Theorie und Praxis Objektiver Persönlichkeitstests (S. 16-23). Bern: Huber.
42. Pawiik, K. & Buse, L. (1982). Rechnergestützte Verhaltensregistrierung im Feld: Beschreibung und erste psychometrische Überprüfung einer neuen Erhebungsmethode, Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 3, 101-118.
43. Pawlik, K. & Buse, L. (1992). Felduntersuchungen zur transsituativen Konsistenz individueller Unterschiede im Erleben und Verhalten. In K. Pawlik & K. H. Stapf (Hrsg.), Umwelt und Verhalten (S. 25-69). Bern: Huber.
44. Pawlik, K. & Buse, L. (1996). Verhaltensbeobachtung in Labor und Feld. In K. Pawlik (Hrsg.), Enzyklopädie der Psychologie: Themenbereich C Theorie und Forschung, Serie VIII Differentielle Psychologie und Persönlichkeitsforschung, Band 1 Grundlagen und Methoden der Differentiellen Psychologie (S. 359-394). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
45. Pawlik, K. & Buse, L. (2002). AMBU. Ambulatory Monitoring and Behavior-Test Unit. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
46. Perrez, M. & Reicherts, M. (1989). Belastungsverarbeitung: Computerunterstützte Selbstbeobachtung im Feld. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 10, 129-139.
47. Perrez, M. & Reicherts, M. (1996). A computer-assisted sell-monitoring procedure for assessing stress-related behavior under real life conditions. In J. Fahrenberg & M. Myrtek (Eds.), Ambulatory Assessment. Computer-assisted psychological and psychophysiological methods in monitoring and field studies (pp. 51-71). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber.
48. Perrez, 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, 326-339.
49. Perrez, M. & Wilhelm, P. (2000). Control psychology under the control of questionnaires. The search for an alternative assessment procedure. In W. J. Perrig & A. Grob (Eds.), Control of human behaviour, mental processes and consciousness (pp. 245-261). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
50. Pickering, T. G. (1991). Ambulatory monitoring and blood pressure variability. London: Science Press.
51. Pohl, R. F. (Ed.) (2004). Cognitive illusions. A handbook on fallacies and biases in thinking, judgment and memory. New York: Psychology Press.
52. Rau, R. & Triemer, A. (2004). Overtime in relation to blood pressure and mood during work, leisure, and night time. Social Indicators Research, 67, 51-73.
53. Reicherts, M. & Perrez, M. (1989). Prediction of behaviour in the natural setting. In J. A. Keats, R. Taft, R. A. Heath & S. H. Lovibond (Eds.), Mathematical and theoretical systems (pp. 111-121). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
54. Robinson, M. D. & Clore, G. L. (2002). Belief and feeling: Evidence for an accessibility model for emotional self-report. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 934-960.
55. Sarason, I. G., Smith, R. E. & Diener, E. (1975). Personality research: Components of variance attributable to the person and the situation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 199-204.
56. Smith, R. E., Leffingwell, T. R. & Ptacek, J. T. (1999). Can people remember how they coped? Factors associated with discordance between same-day and retrospective reports. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 1050-1061.
57. Staats, M. (2005). Emotionsregulation und Emotionsübertragung von berufstätigen Elternpaaren. Dissertation. Fribourg: Departement für Psychologie.
58. Thiele, C., Laireiter, A.-R. & Baumann, U. (2002). Diaries in clinical psychology and psychotherapy: A selective review. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 9, 1-37.
59. Tourangeau, R. & Rasinski, K. A. (1988). Cognitive processes underlying context effects in attitude measurement. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 299-314.
60. Wilhelm, F. H. & Roth, W. T. (2001). The somatic symptom paradox in DSM-IV anxiety disorders: suggestions for a clinical focus inpsychophysiology. Biological Psychology, 57, 105-140.
61. Wilhelm, P., Myrtek, M. & Brügner, G. (1997). Vorschulkinder vor dem Fernseher. Ein psychophysiologisches Feldexperiment. Bern: Huber.
62. Wilhelm, P. & Perrez, M. (2001). Felddiagnostik. In R.-D. Stieglitz, U. Baumann & H. J. Freyberger (Hrsg.), Psychodiagnostik in Klinischer Psychologie, Psychiatrie, Psychotherapie (S. 169-182). Stuttgart: Thieme.
63. Wilhelm, P. (2004). Empathie im Alltag von Paaren. Akkuratheit und Projektion bei der Einschätzung des Befindens des Partners. Bern: Huber.
64. Wilhelm, P. & Perrez, M. (2004). How is my partner feeling in different daily-life settings? Accuracy of spouses' judgements about their partner's feelings at work and at home. Social Indicators Research, 67, 183-246.