Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41731075›Full record

ReviewCommunications psychology2026

Experience sampling methods require more than numbers.

Laura F Bringmann, Guðrún R Guðmundsdóttir, Leonie Schorrlepp, Leonie V D E Vogelsmeier, Melissa M De Smet, Charlotte Vrijen, Eeske van Roekel, Jessica Fritz, Jennifer X Chen, Olivia Kirtley and 4 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Communications psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Laura F BringmannDepartment of Psychometrics and Statistics, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. l.f.bringmann@rug.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8091-9935
Guðrún R GuðmundsdóttirDepartment of Clinical Psychological Science, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0912-6414
Leonie SchorrleppDepartment of Developmental Psychology, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-7058-4395
Leonie V D E VogelsmeierTilburg Experience Sampling Center, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1666-7112
Melissa M De SmetDepartment of Methodology and Statistics, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Charlotte VrijenDepartment of Developmental Psychology, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5144-7863
Eeske van RoekelDepartment of Developmental Psychology, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0829-8089
Jessica FritzDepartment of Psychology, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.
Jennifer X ChenDepartment of Methodology and Statistics, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-8078-1773
Olivia KirtleyDepartment of Psychology, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Markus I EronenDepartment of Theoretical Philosophy, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2028-3338
Joanne M ChungDepartment of Psychology, University of Toronto Mississauga, Mississauga, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2191-9644
Marie StadelDepartment of Psychometrics and Statistics, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Katie HoemannDepartment of Psychology, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9938-7676

Funding

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research) 024.005.010Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research) 406.22.24GO.006Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research) VI.Veni.211G.033Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research) VI.Veni.221G.103
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The experience sampling method (ESM) collects people's real-time reports about their feelings, actions, and surroundings. While this method originally included both numerical and open-ended responses, most studies today focus only on the numbers. We argue that ESM researchers should collect and analyze open-ended responses again, as they are crucial for understanding what the numbers really mean, and for capturing parts of experience that numbers alone cannot, such as context, the "why" behind responses, and the temporal order of events. Open-ended responses can improve ESM data by grounding it in real-world experiences and phenomena as they are experienced in everyday life. Therefore, handbooks and guidelines on ESM should again include dedicated sections on collecting and analyzing open-ended text items. We highlight future work that is needed to achieve the systematic integration of open-ended items and their analysis into ESM research.

Identifiers

PMID41731075
PMCPMC12929055

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.