878
Views
6
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies of reactivity to digital in-the-moment measurement of health behaviour

ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Pages 551-575 | Received 27 Aug 2021, Accepted 23 Feb 2022, Published online: 21 Mar 2022
 

ABSTRACT

Self-report measures of health behaviour have several limitations including measurement reactivity, i.e., changes in people’s behaviour, cognitions or emotions due to taking part in research. This systematic review investigates whether digital in-the-moment measures induce reactivity to a similar extent and why it occurs. Four databases were searched in December 2020. All observational or experimental studies investigating reactivity to digital in-the-moment measurement of a range of health behaviours were included if they were published in English in 2008 or later. Of the 11,723 records initially screened, 30 publications reporting on 31 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis/ 7 studies in the quantitative synthesis. Eighty-one percent of studies focused on reactivity to the measurement of physical activity indicators; small but meaningful pooled effects were found (Cohen’s ds: 0.27–0.30). Only a small number of studies included other behaviours, yielding mixed results. Digital in-the-moment measurement of behaviour thus may be as prone to reactivity as self-reports in questionnaires. Measurement reactivity may be amplified by (1) ease of changing the behaviour (2) awareness of being measured and social desirability, and (3) resolving discrepancies between actual and desired behaviour through self-regulation.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

A list of all full texts screened, the raw data extracted from the included publications, effect sizes and Jamovi analysis files can be obtained from https://osf.io/qnmvj/. The search strategy, a list of all extracted information, effect sizes for the experimental studies and results of the risk of bias assessment can be found in the online supplement.

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 53.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 216.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.