Social-Ecological Measurement of Daily Life: How Relationally Focused Ambulatory Assessment Can Advance Clinical Intervention Science

IF 3.6 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Review of General Psychology Pub Date : 2022-11-30 DOI:10.1177/10892680221142802
Deanna M. Kaplan
{"title":"Social-Ecological Measurement of Daily Life: How Relationally Focused Ambulatory Assessment Can Advance Clinical Intervention Science","authors":"Deanna M. Kaplan","doi":"10.1177/10892680221142802","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Individuals’ daily behaviors and social interactions play a central role in the diagnosis and treatment of psychological disorders. Despite this, observational ambulatory assessment methods—research methods that allow for direct and passive assessment of individuals’ momentary activities and interactions—have a remarkably scant history in the clinical science field. Prior discussions of ambulatory assessment methods in clinical science have focused on subjective methods (e.g., ecological momentary assessment) and physiological methods (e.g., wearable heart rate monitoring). Comparatively less attention has been dedicated to ambulatory assessment methods that collect objective, relational data about individuals’ social behaviors and their interactions with their momentary environmental contexts. Drawing on extant social-ecological measurement frameworks, this article first provides a conceptual and psychometric rationale for the integration of daily relational data into clinical science research. Next, the nascent research applying such methods to clinical science is reviewed, and priorities for further research organized by the NIH Stage Model for Clinical Science Research are recommended. These data can provide unique information about the social contexts of diverse patient populations; identify social-ecological targets for transdiagnostic, precision, and culturally responsive interventions; and contribute novel data about the effectiveness of established interventions at creating behavioral and relational change.","PeriodicalId":48306,"journal":{"name":"Review of General Psychology","volume":"27 1","pages":"206 - 227"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of General Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10892680221142802","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Individuals’ daily behaviors and social interactions play a central role in the diagnosis and treatment of psychological disorders. Despite this, observational ambulatory assessment methods—research methods that allow for direct and passive assessment of individuals’ momentary activities and interactions—have a remarkably scant history in the clinical science field. Prior discussions of ambulatory assessment methods in clinical science have focused on subjective methods (e.g., ecological momentary assessment) and physiological methods (e.g., wearable heart rate monitoring). Comparatively less attention has been dedicated to ambulatory assessment methods that collect objective, relational data about individuals’ social behaviors and their interactions with their momentary environmental contexts. Drawing on extant social-ecological measurement frameworks, this article first provides a conceptual and psychometric rationale for the integration of daily relational data into clinical science research. Next, the nascent research applying such methods to clinical science is reviewed, and priorities for further research organized by the NIH Stage Model for Clinical Science Research are recommended. These data can provide unique information about the social contexts of diverse patient populations; identify social-ecological targets for transdiagnostic, precision, and culturally responsive interventions; and contribute novel data about the effectiveness of established interventions at creating behavioral and relational change.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
日常生活的社会生态测量:关系聚焦的门诊评估如何促进临床干预科学
个体的日常行为和社会交往在心理障碍的诊断和治疗中起着核心作用。尽管如此,观察性动态评估方法——允许直接和被动评估个人瞬间活动和互动的研究方法——在临床科学领域的历史非常少。先前在临床科学中对动态评估方法的讨论集中在主观方法(例如,生态瞬时评估)和生理方法(例如可穿戴心率监测)上。相对而言,人们较少关注动态评估方法,该方法收集有关个人社会行为及其与瞬时环境互动的客观关系数据。借鉴现有的社会生态测量框架,本文首先为将日常关系数据整合到临床科学研究中提供了概念和心理测量的基本原理。接下来,回顾了将这些方法应用于临床科学的新兴研究,并推荐了由美国国立卫生研究院临床科学研究阶段模型组织的进一步研究的优先事项。这些数据可以提供关于不同患者群体的社会背景的独特信息;确定跨诊断、精确和文化响应干预的社会生态目标;并提供关于既定干预措施在创造行为和关系变化方面的有效性的新数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Review of General Psychology
Review of General Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
4.80%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Review of General Psychology seeks to publish innovative theoretical, conceptual, or methodological articles that cross-cut the traditional subdisciplines of psychology. The journal contains articles that advance theory, evaluate and integrate research literatures, provide a new historical analysis, or discuss new methodological developments in psychology as a whole. Review of General Psychology is especially interested in articles that bridge gaps between subdisciplines in psychology as well as related fields or that focus on topics that transcend traditional subdisciplinary boundaries.
期刊最新文献
Relational Ontology in the Mapuche Thinking: Possibilities for Indigenous Well-Being Amidst Colonial Settings Education and Training: Professional The 4D Model of American Political Conservatism: Disgust, Disorder Aversion, Deontology, and (Social) Dominance The Kokoro in Japanese Spiritual Care Antiracist Psychology to Advance Equitable Public Policy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1