ArticleJournal for person-oriented research2024
Transitions and Resilience in Ecological Momentary Assessment: A Multiple Single-Case Study.
Article in Journal for person-oriented research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Too Little, Too Much: Evidence for Quadratic Patterns in Emotion Regulation Strategy Use in Daily Life.Affective science · 2026Article
- Profiles and Temporal Dynamics of Personality-Related Language in a 16-year Professional Email Archive: A Subject-Specific Study (2008-2024).Journal for person-oriented research · 2026Article
- Treatment of Anxiety in Athletes Using Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: A Single-Case Experimental Design with Multiple Baselines.Journal for person-oriented research · 2026Article
- The 10th yearly volume of JPOR is complete.Journal for person-oriented research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) of affect, cognition and behavior aims to provide a 'window into a person's daily life'. But what should we look for through this window? In this paper, we compare a statistical perspective, grounded in probability theory, with a dynamic pattern perspective, grounded in complexity theory, on two common phenomena in EMA data: non-stationarity and outlying values. From a statistical perspective, these phenomena are considered nuisances that should be dealt with. From a dynamic pattern perspective, in contrast, non-stationarity may signal transitions from one dynamic pattern to another (e.g., a transition from a neutral to a persistent sad mood), whereas outlying values may signal recovery from perturbations (e.g., stressful life events). We evaluated the dynamic pattern view with a triangulation study of multiple single cases that took part in the Track your Mood EMA study, where participants reported on their emotions and daily events for 60 days. We found that non-stationarity was indeed related to a pattern transition, whereas outlying values were related to recovery after perturbations. These findings show that person-oriented EMA research would benefit from a dynamic pattern perspective that can identify highly meaningful and clinically relevant phenomena that are otherwise at risk of being missed. Complementing EMA time series with contextual information and qualitative data will be essential to genuinely understand these phenomena.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.