Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is a set of longitudinal methods that researchers can use to understand complex processes (e.g., health, behavior, emotion) in "high resolution." Although technology has made EMA data collection easier, concerns remain about the consistency and quality of data collected from participants who are enrolled and followed online. In this study, we used EMA data from a larger study on HIV-risk behavior among men who have sex with men (MSM) to explore whether several indicators of data consistency/quality differed across those who elected to enroll in-person and those enrolled online. One hundred MSM (age 18-54) completed a 30-day EMA study. Forty-five of these participants chose to enroll online. There were no statistically significant differences in response rates for any survey type (e.g., daily diary [DD], experience sampling [ES], event-contingent [EC]) across participants who enrolled in-person versus online. DD and ES survey response rates were consistent across the study and did not differ between groups. EC response rates fell sharply across the study, but this pattern was also consistent across groups. Participants' responses on the DD were generally consistent with a poststudy follow-up Timeline Followback (TLFB) with some underreporting on the TLFB, but this pattern was consistent across both groups. In this sample of well-educated, mostly White MSM recruited from urban areas, EMA data collected from participants followed online was as consistent, reliable, and valid as data collected from participants followed in-person. These findings yield important insights about best practices for EMA studies with cautions regarding generalizability. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

使用互联网访问生态瞬时评估研究中的关键人群：比较远程注册与亲自注册的人的依从性、反应性和不稳定的反应。

生态瞬时评估 (EMA) 是一组纵向方法，研究人员可以使用这些方法以“高分辨率”了解复杂的过程（例如，健康、行为、情绪）。尽管技术使 EMA 数据收集变得更加容易，但人们仍然担心从在线注册和跟踪的参与者那里收集的数据的一致性和质量。在这项研究中，我们使用了来自一项关于男男性行为者 (MSM) 的 HIV 风险行为的更大规模研究的 EMA 数据，以探讨数据一致性/质量的几个指标在选择亲自注册的人和注册的人之间是否存在差异在线的。一百名 MSM（18-54 岁）完成了一项为期 30 天的 EMA 研究。其中 45 名参与者选择在线注册。对于任何调查类型（例如，每日日记 [DD]、经验抽样 [ES]、事件条件 [EC])，涵盖面对面注册与在线注册的参与者。DD 和 ES 调查响应率在整个研究中是一致的，并且在组之间没有差异。EC 反应率在整个研究中急剧下降，但这种模式在各组之间也是一致的。参与者对 DD 的反应大体上与研究后随访时间线回溯 (TLFB) 一致，但对 TLFB 的一些报告不足，但这种模式在两组中都是一致的。在这个从城市地区招募的受过良好教育、主要是白人 MSM 的样本中，从在线跟踪的参与者收集的 EMA 数据与从参与者收集的数据一样一致、可靠和有效。这些发现为 EMA 研究的最佳实践提供了重要的见解，但对普遍性提出了警告。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA，保留所有权利）。