Pub Date : 2024-01-29DOI: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000511
C. McCombie, G. Esponda, Ulrike Schmidt, Vanessa Lawrence
Abstract: Qualitative diary methods (QDMs) have great potential for mental health research, as they provide rich data about experiences and phenomena as and when they happen, from the perspectives of participants themselves. They provide unique insight into behavior, cognitions, and change over time in greater depth and detail than other quantitative or qualitative methods might offer. This paper presents the results of a scoping review of QDMs in mental health research, aimed at clarifying how diary methods are used in mental health research, and outlining key decisions and considerations in planning and conducting a qualitative diary study. Forty-eight papers were reviewed, and the findings highlight different elements of QDMs. The research aims, suitability for participants, and ethical issues are first discussed, followed by elements of diary study design including diary format, administration, intervals, timeline, sample size, diary structure and guidance, and additional data collection methods. Finally, analysis approaches and the strengths and challenges of QDMs are reviewed. Discussion around the future of QDMs follows, including a checklist for conducting and reporting a qualitative diary study.
{"title":"Qualitative Diary Methods in Mental Health Research","authors":"C. McCombie, G. Esponda, Ulrike Schmidt, Vanessa Lawrence","doi":"10.1027/1016-9040/a000511","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000511","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: Qualitative diary methods (QDMs) have great potential for mental health research, as they provide rich data about experiences and phenomena as and when they happen, from the perspectives of participants themselves. They provide unique insight into behavior, cognitions, and change over time in greater depth and detail than other quantitative or qualitative methods might offer. This paper presents the results of a scoping review of QDMs in mental health research, aimed at clarifying how diary methods are used in mental health research, and outlining key decisions and considerations in planning and conducting a qualitative diary study. Forty-eight papers were reviewed, and the findings highlight different elements of QDMs. The research aims, suitability for participants, and ethical issues are first discussed, followed by elements of diary study design including diary format, administration, intervals, timeline, sample size, diary structure and guidance, and additional data collection methods. Finally, analysis approaches and the strengths and challenges of QDMs are reviewed. Discussion around the future of QDMs follows, including a checklist for conducting and reporting a qualitative diary study.","PeriodicalId":507579,"journal":{"name":"European Psychologist","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140489358","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-01-17DOI: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000513
Merle Madita Wachendörfer, Aileen Oeberst
Abstract: Despite a number of real-life cases of false memories and various studies on the suggestion of false memories, little attention has been paid to the distinction between true and false memory reports. The present review summarizes the current state of research on comparing true and false memories. After an extensive search, n = 22 articles (24 studies) were included in the scoping review. From 70 statement characteristics, seven yielded significant differences that have been repeatedly obtained and outnumbered null results. From 61 self-evaluations, significant differences were found repeatedly and more often than null results for seven variables. However, due to substantial conceptual caveats in 18 studies, robust differences between true and false memories are documented for only six variables – three self-report measures (subjective confidence, vividness/clarity, auditory experience) and three statement characteristics (number of idea units, number of words, amount/quantity of details). Differences do not guarantee discriminability, however. Therefore, we argue that reliable and valid indicators for forensic practice may not be derived. Instead, we put forward several recommendations for future research, which is urgently needed.
{"title":"Differences Between True and False Autobiographical Memories","authors":"Merle Madita Wachendörfer, Aileen Oeberst","doi":"10.1027/1016-9040/a000513","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000513","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: Despite a number of real-life cases of false memories and various studies on the suggestion of false memories, little attention has been paid to the distinction between true and false memory reports. The present review summarizes the current state of research on comparing true and false memories. After an extensive search, n = 22 articles (24 studies) were included in the scoping review. From 70 statement characteristics, seven yielded significant differences that have been repeatedly obtained and outnumbered null results. From 61 self-evaluations, significant differences were found repeatedly and more often than null results for seven variables. However, due to substantial conceptual caveats in 18 studies, robust differences between true and false memories are documented for only six variables – three self-report measures (subjective confidence, vividness/clarity, auditory experience) and three statement characteristics (number of idea units, number of words, amount/quantity of details). Differences do not guarantee discriminability, however. Therefore, we argue that reliable and valid indicators for forensic practice may not be derived. Instead, we put forward several recommendations for future research, which is urgently needed.","PeriodicalId":507579,"journal":{"name":"European Psychologist","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139618008","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：