Paper or Plastic? Data Equivalence in Paper and Electronic Diaries

• Published in: Psychological methods Vol. 11; no. 1; pp. 87 - 105
• Main Authors: Green, Amie S, Rafaeli, Eshkol, Bolger, Niall, Shrout, Patrick E, Reis, Harry T
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States American Psychological Association 01.03.2006
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; Bias; Compliance (Psychology); Computer Mediated Communication; Computers, Handheld - statistics & numerical data; Data Interpretation, Statistical; Diaries; Emotions; Female; Humans; Interpersonal Relations; Male; Mathematical Computing; Measurement Techniques; Medical Records - statistics & numerical data; Paper (Material); Patient Compliance - statistics & numerical data; Psychological Studies; Psychometrics; Reproducibility of Results; Self-Assessment; Surveys and Questionnaires; Time Factors; Validity; Writing
• DOI: 10.1037/1082-989X.11.1.87
• ISSN: 1082-989X

Concern has been raised about the lack of participant compliance in diary studies that use paper-and-pencil as opposed to electronic formats. Three studies explored the magnitude of compliance problems and their effects on data quality. Study 1 used random signals to elicit diary reports and found close matches to self-reported completion times, matches that could not plausibly have been fabricated. Studies 2 and 3 examined the psychometric and statistical equivalence of data obtained with paper versus electronic formats. With minor exceptions, both methods yielded data that were equivalent psychometrically and in patterns of findings. These results serve to at least partially mollify concern about the validity of paper diary methods.