Key Words experience sampling method, longitudinal designs, electronic data collection, self-report measures, multilevel models s Abstract In diary studies, people provide frequent reports on the events and experiences of their daily lives. These reports capture the particulars of experience in a way that is not possible using traditional designs. We review the types of research questions that diary methods are best equipped to answer, the main designs that can be used, current technology for obtaining diary reports, and appropriate data analysis strategies. Major recent developments include the use of electronic forms of data collection and multilevel models in data analysis. We identify several areas of research opportunities: 1. in technology, combining electronic diary reports with collateral measures such as ambulatory heart rate; 2. in measurement, switching from measures based on between-person differences to those based on within-person changes; and 3. in research questions, using diaries to (a) explain why people differ in variability rather than mean level, (b) study change processes during major events and transitions, and (c) study interpersonal processes using dyadic and group diary methods.

Abstract not found

This paper analyzes the theoretical, pragmatic, and substantive factors that have hampered the integration between psychology and psychometrics. Theoretical factors include the operationalist mode of thinking which is common throughout psychology, the dominance of classical test theory, and the use of “construct validity ” as a catch-all category for a range of challenging psychometric problems. Pragmatic factors include the lack of interest in mathematically precise thinking in psychology, inadequate representation of psychometric modeling in major statistics programs, and insufficient mathematical training in the psychological curriculum. Substantive factors relate to the absence of psychological theories that are sufficiently strong to motivate the structure of psychometric models. Following the identification of these problems, a number of promising recent developments are discussed, and suggestions are made to further the integration of psychology and psychometrics.

Diary methods allow researchers to study marital and family processes within the context of daily life in a way that is not possible with more traditional methods. The authors review applications of diary designs in marital and family research and detail the types of research questions that can uniquely be asked of dyadic/family diary data. Technological developments for the use of electronic palm-top devices for implementing diary methods are also reviewed. Additionally, the authors discuss specific issues relevant to the analysis of diary data that come from dyads or families. Last, the authors raise unresolved issues and directions for future research in the use of diary methods for studying marital and family processes.

In 3 studies, the authors investigated whether within-persons increases in rumination about an interper-sonal transgression were associated with within-persons reductions in forgiveness. Results supported this hypothesis. The association of transient increases in rumination with transient reductions in forgiveness appeared to be mediated by anger, but not fear, toward the transgressor. The association of rumination and forgiveness was not confounded by daily fluctuations in positive affect and negative affect, and it was not moderated by trait levels of positive affectivity, negative affectivity, or perceived hurtfulness of the transgression. Cross-lagged associations of rumination and forgiveness in Study 3 more consistently supported the proposition that increased rumination precedes reductions in forgiveness than the propo-sition that increased forgiveness precedes reductions in rumination.

Inmanagement research, there is a growing trend toward formativemeasurement, in whichmeasures are treated as causes of constructs. Formative measurement can be contrasted with reflective measurement, in which constructs are specified as causes of measures. Although recent work seems to suggest that formative measurement is a viable alternative to reflective measurement, the emerging enthusiasm for formative measurement is based on conceptions of constructs, measures, and causality that are difficult to defend. This article critically compares reflective and formative measurement on the basis of dimensionality, internal consistency, identification, measurement error, construct validity, and causality. This comparison leads to the conclusion that the presumed viability of formative measurement is a fallacy, and the objectives of formative measurement can be achieved using alternative models with reflective measures.

An important, sometimes controversial feature of all psychological phenomena is whether they are categorical or dimensional. A conceptual and psychometric framework is described for distinguishing whether the latent structure behind manifest categories (e.g., psychiatric diagnoses, attitude groups, or stages of development) is category-like or dimension-like. Being dimension-like requires (a) withincategory heterogeneity and (b) between-category quantitative differences. Being category-like requires (a) within-category homogeneity and (b) between-category qualitative differences. The relation between this classification and abrupt versus smooth differences is discussed. Hybrid structures are possible. Being category-like is itself a matter of degree; the authors offer a formalized framework to determine this degree. Empirical applications to personality disorders, attitudes toward capital punishment, and stages of cognitive development illustrate the approach. In this article we describe a conceptual and psychometric scheme for distinguishing the categorical versus dimensional nature of psychological variables. By psychological variables we mean variables used to distinguish between entities in some psychological respect. These entities are commonly persons, but they

Abstract not found

This paper summarizes and expands research on cognitive aging from the Berlin Aging Study (BASE), a longitudinal, multidisciplinary, and population-based investigation of old and very old individuals. First, we describe previously reported research on five key themes: (a) experimental and mortality-associated components of longitudinal selectivity; (b) comparisons between cross-sectional and cross-sectional/ longitudinal convergence age gradients; (c) old-age dedifferentiation of inter-individual differences; (d) possible reasons for the age-based increase in the link between intellectual and sensory domains; and (e) limits to cognitive plasticity in very old age. Second, we make use of multilevel modeling to determine the magnitude and direction of retest effects. Retest effects are classified as either flat (step function from the first to the second measurement occasion) or growing (linear increase after the first measurement occasion). Five of the eight longitudinally administered cognitive tests are found to display significant retest effects of either or both types. Retest adjustment increased the linear negative and decreased the quadratic negative component of cross-sectional/longitudinal convergence gradients in measures of intellectual abilities. The Berlin Aging Study (BASE; Baltes, Mayer, Helmchen, & Steinhagen-Thiessen, 1999) is a

This study examined competing hypotheses about dynamic cross-domain associations between percep-tual speed and well-being in advanced old age. We applied the bivariate dual change score model (J. J. McArdle & F. Hamagami, 2001) to 13-year incomplete longitudinal data from the Berlin Aging Study (P. B. Baltes & K. U. Mayer, 1999; N 516, 70–103 years at T1, M 85 years). Reports of well-being were found to influence subsequent decline in perceptual speed (time lags of 2 years). No evidence was found for a directed effect in the other direction. None of the potential covariates examined (initial health constraints, personality, and social participation) accounted for these differential lead–lag associations. Our results suggest that well-being is not only a consequence of but also a source for successful aging. The discussion focuses on conceptual implications and methodological considerations.