skip to main content
research-article

The Experience Sampling Method and its Tools: A Review for Developers, Study Administrators, and Participants

Published:19 June 2023Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

The Experience Sampling Method (ESM) is a popular research method found in many fields to gather rich insights into participants' thoughts, emotions, and daily routines near the moment they happen. During the last decade, many technologically advanced ESM tools emerged that combine manually entered self-reports with automatically collected data from device sensors. In fact, it became difficult to keep track of them. We compiled a survey of ESM and its tools addressing technological capabilities for developers, study design opportunities for study administrators, and answering usability for study participants. It comprises data from 30 systems, applications, and toolkits, which are used for ESM studies. We present our results on the current state of the art from these main user perspectives, list general shortcomings, and give recommendations for future ESM tools.

References

  1. ACM. ACM Digital Library. ACM Inc., https://dl.acm.org/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Apache. Apache Cordova. https://cordova.apache.org/, 2022. (Accessed 20/04/2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Apple. ResearchKit -- Create Powerful Apps for Medical Research. http://researchkit.org/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Arslan, Ruben C, Walther, Matthias P and Tata, Cyril S. (2020). form: A Study Framework Allowing for Automated Feedback Generation and Complex Longitudinal Experience-Sampling Studies using R. Behavior Research Methods 52, 1. pp. 376--387.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Bachmann, Anja, Zetzsche, Robert, Schankin, Andrea, Riedel, Till, Beigl, Michael, Reichert, Markus, Santangelo, Philip and Ebner-Priemer, Ulrich. (2015). ESMAC: A Web-Based Configurator for Context-Aware Experience Sampling Apps in Ambulatory Assessment. In Proceedings of the 5th EAI International Conference on Wireless Mobile Communication and Healthcare (London, Great Britain). ICST. pp. 15--18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Batalas, Nikolaos, aan het Rot, Marije, Khan, Vassilis Javed and Markopoulos, Panos. (2018). Using TEMPEST: End-User Programming of Web-Based Ecological Momentary Assessment Protocols. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 2, EICS. pp. 1--24.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Batalas, Nikoloas and Markopoulos, Panos. (2012). Considerations for Computerised In Situ Data Collection Platforms. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems - EICS 2012 (June 25--26, Copenhagen, Denmark). ACM, N.Y. pp. 231--236.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Behavio. Funf | Open Sensing Framework. https://www.funf.org/about.html, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. BlueJayVentures. PIEL Survey | Experience Sampling Method (ESM) | Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) | Survey Software. https://pielsurvey.org/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Broda, Michael. (2017). Using Multilevel Models to Explore Predictors of High School Students' Nonresponse in Experience Sampling Method (ESM) Studies. Social Science Computer Review 35, 6. pp. 733--750.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Carter, Scott, Mankoff, Jennifer and Heer, Jeffrey. (2007). Momento: Support for Situated Ubicomp Experimentation. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (San Jose, California, USA). Association for Computing Machinery. pp. 125--134.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Clarivate. Web of Science. https://webofknowledge.com, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Django. The Web Framework for Perfectionists with Deadlines | Django. https://www.djangoproject.com/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Enketo. Web Forms Evolved. Deploy and Conduct Surveys that Work without a Connection, on Any Device. https://enketo.org/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. ESMCapture. Experience Sampling Made Simple. http://esmcapture.com/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. EsperTech. Complex Event Processing, Streaming Analytics, Streaming SQL - EsperTech. https://www.espertech.com/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. EU. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the Protection of Natural Persons with Regard to the Processing of Personal Data and on the Free Movement of Such Data, and Repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj, 2022.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Evans, Bob. (2016). Paco-Applying Computational Methods to Scale Qualitative Methods. In Ethnographic Praxis in Industry Conference Proceedings (Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA). Wiley Online Library. pp. 348--368.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Feldman Barrett, Lisa and Barrett, Daniel. (Summer 2001). An Introduction to Computerised Experience Sampling in Psychology. Social Science Computer Review 19, 2. pp. 175--185.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Ferreira, Denzil, Kostakos, Vassilis and Dey, Anind K. (2015). AWARE: Mobile Context Instrumentation Framework. Frontiers in ICT 2. pp. 6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Fischer, Joel E. (2009). Experience-sampling tools: a critical review. Mobile living labs 09: Methods and tools for evaluation in the wild. pp. 35.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Froehlich, Jon, Chen, Mike Y, Consolvo, Sunny, Harrison, Beverly and Landay, James A. (2007). MyExperience: A System for In Situ Tracing and Capturing of User Feedback on Mobile Phones. In Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Mobile systems, applications and services (San Juan, Puerto Rico). Association for Computing Machinery. pp. 57--70.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Funk, Matthias, Liang, Rong-Hao, Palanque, Philippe, Hu, Jun and Markopoulos, Panos. (June 2021). Engineering Interactive Computing Systems 2022: Editorial Introduction. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, EICS, 193. pp. 193:1--193:4.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Gamma, Erich, Helm, Richard, Johnson, Ralph and Vlissides, John. (1995). Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.,Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Google. Flutter - Beautiful Native Apps in Record Time. https://flutter.dev/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Google. Google Scholar. https://scholar.google.com/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Google. Protocol Buffers | Google Developers. https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Hall, Malcolm, Bell, Marek, Morrison, Alistair, Reeves, Stuart, Sherwood, Scott and Chalmers, Matthew. (2009). Adapting Ubicomp Software and its Evaluation. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems - EICS 2009 (July 15--17, Pittsburgh, PA). ACM, N.Y. pp. 141--148.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Harari, Gabriella M, Lane, Nicholas D, Wang, Rui, Crosier, Benjamin S, Campbell, Andrew T and Gosling, Samuel D. (2016). Using Smartphones to Collect Behavioral Data in Psychological Science: Opportunities, Practical Considerations, and Challenges. Perspectives on Psychological Science 11, 6. pp. 838--854.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Hektner, Joel M., Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly and Schmidt, Jennifer A. (2006). Experience Sampling Method: Measuring the Quality of Everyday Life. Sage Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Hofmann, Wilhelm and Patel, Paresh V. (2015). SurveySignal: A Convenient Solution for Experience Sampling Research Using Participants' Own Smartphones Social Science Computer Review 33, 2. pp. 235--253.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. iDialogPad. This is an EMA (Ecological Momentary Assessment) and General Questionaire Universal App for iOS. https://github.com/gemu2015/iDialogPad, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. IEEE. IEEE Xplore. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org, 2022. (Accessed 03/04/2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. ilumivu. mEMA App : ilumivu. https://ilumivu.com/solutions/ecological-momentary-assessment-app/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Intille, Stephen S, Rondoni, John, Kukla, Charles, Ancona, Isabel and Bao, Ling. (2003). A Context-Aware Experience Sampling Tool. In CHI '03 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA). Association for Computing Machinery. pp. 972--973.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Intille, Stephen S, Stone, AA and Shiffman, S. (2007). Technological Innovations Enabling Automatic, Context-Sensitive Ecological Momentary Assessment. The Science of Real-Time Data Capture: Self-Reports in Health Research. pp. 308--337.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. ISO. Ergonomics of Human-System Interaction - Part 11: Usability: Definitions and Concepts. https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:9241:-11:ed-2:v1:en, 2018. (Accessed 20/04/2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Karr, Chris. Purple Robot is an Android Application for Creating Automated Experiences on the Android Platform with Sensing and Inference Capabilities. https://github.com/cbitstech/Purple-Robot, 2022. (Accessed 19/07/2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Keusch, Florian and Conrad, Frederick G. (2021). Using Smartphones to Capture and Combine Self-Reports and Passively Measured Behavior in Social Research. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Koval, Peter, Hinton, J, Dozo, N, Gleeson, John, Alvarez, Mario, Harrison, A, Vu, D, Susanto, R, Jayaputera, G and Sinnott, Richard. SEMA3: Smartphone Ecological Momentary Assessment, Version 3. https://sema3.com/, 2019. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Larson, Reed and Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. (2014). The Experience Sampling Method. In Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly, ed. Flow and the Foundations of Positive Psychology. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg. pp. 21--34.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Lathia, Neal, Rachuri, Kiran, Mascolo, Cecilia and Roussos, George. (2013). Open Source Smartphone Libraries for Computational Social Science. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM conference on Pervasive and ubiquitous computing adjunct publication (Zurich, Switzerland). Association for Computing Machinery. pp. 911--920.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Lawes, Mario, Hetschko, Clemens, Sakshaug, Joseph W and Grießemer, Stephan. (2021). Contact Modes and Participation in App-Based Smartphone Surveys: Evidence From a Large-Scale Experiment. Social Science Computer Review. pp. 1--17.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. LifeData. LifeData Experience Sampling App | LifeData Experience Sampling App for Research. https://www.lifedatacorp.com/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Ludwig, Thomas, Dax, Julian, Pipek, Volkmar and Randall, Dave. (2016). Work or Leisure? Designing a User-Centered Approach for Researching Activity ?in the Wild". Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 20, 4. pp. 487--515.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Luyten, Kris, Palanque, Philippe, Quigley, Aaron and Winckler, Marco. (June 2022). Engineering Interactive Computing Systems 2022: Editorial Introduction. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 6, EICS, 149. pp. 149:1--149:3.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Meers, Kristof, Dejonckheere, Egon, Kalokerinos, Elise K, Rummens, Koen and Kuppens, Peter. (2020). mobileQ: A Free User-Friendly Application for Collecting Experience Sampling Data. Behaviour Research Methods 52, 4. pp. 1510--1515.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Metricwire. Metricwire Inc. | Real-World Intelligence | Value Based-Decisions. https://metricwire.com/, 2022. (Accessed 19/07/2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Microsoft. GitHub: Where the World Builds Software · GitHub. https://github.com/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Microsoft. Xamarin | Open-Source Mobile App Platform for .NET. https://dotnet.microsoft.com/apps/xamarin, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. movisensXS. movisensXS -- Experience Sampling Solution. movisens GmbH. https://www.movisens.com/en/products/movisensxs/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Mozilla. MDN Web Docs. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/, 2022. (Accessed 20/04/2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Nielson, Jakob. 10 Usability Heuristics for User Interface Design. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/ten-usability-heuristics/, 1994. (Accessed 20/04/2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. O'Reilly-Shah, Vikas and Mackey, Sean. (Apr-Jun 2016). Survalytics: An Open-Source Cloud-Integrated Experience Sampling, Survey, and Analytics and Metadata Collection Module for Android Operating System Apps. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 4, 2. pp. 17--26.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. ODK-X. Build your Custom Data Management App. https://odk-x.org/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. ODK. Collect Data Anywhere. https://getodk.org/index.html, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. OpenCPU. OpenCPU - Producing and Reproducing Results. https://www.opencpu.org/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Page, Matthew J., McKenzie, Joanne E., Bossuyt, Patrick M., Boutron, Isabelle, Hoffmann, Tammy C., Mulrow, Cynthia D., Shamseer, Larissa, Tetzlaff, Jennifer M., Akl, Elie A., Brennan, Sue E., Chou, Roger, Glanville, Julie, Grimshaw, Jeremy M., Hróbjartsson, Asbjørn, Lalu, Manoj M., Li, Tianjing, Loder, Elizabeth W., Mayo-Wilson, Evan, McDonald, Steve, McGuinness, Luke A., Stewart, Lesley A., Thomas, James, Tricco, Andrea C., Welch, Vivian A., Whiting, Penny and Moher, David (2021). The PRISMA 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews. Systematic Reviews 10, 89. pp. 2--11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. Pejovic, Veliko, Lathia, Neal, Mascolo, Cecilia and Musolesi, Mirco. (2016). Mobile-Based Experience Sampling for Behaviour Research. In Tkalcic, Marko, De Carolis, Berardina, de Gemmis, Marco, Odic, Ante and Kosir, Andrej, eds. Emotions and Personality in Personalised Services. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg. pp. 141--161.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  60. Pejovic, Veljko, Lathia, Neal, Mascolo, Cecilia and Musolesi, Mirco. (2016). Mobile-Based Experience Sampling for Behaviour Research. In Emotions and personality in personalised services. Springer. pp. 141--161.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  61. Qualtrics. Online Survey Software - 1B+ Surveys Annually | Qualtrics. https://www.qualtrics.com/uk/core-xm/survey-software/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Rough, Daniel J and Quigley, Aaron. (2020). End-User Development of Experience Sampling Smartphone Apps-Recommendations and Requirements. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 4, 2. pp. 1--19.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. Rough, Daniel John and Quigley, Aaron John. (2017). Jeeves - An Experience Sampling Study Creation Tool. In BCS Health Informatics Scotland (HIS) (Edinburgh, United Kingdom). BCS Electronic Workshops in Computing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Salganik, Matthew J. (2019). Bit by Bit: Social Research in the Digital Age. Princeton University Press,Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Silvia, Paul J, Kwapil, Thomas R, Eddington, Kari M and Brown, Leslie H. (2013). Missed Beeps and Missing Data: Dispositional and Situational Predictors of Nonresponse in Experience Sampling Research. Social Science Computer Review 31, 4. pp. 471--481.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  66. Stier, Sebastian, Breuer, Johannes, Siegers, Pascal and Thorson, Kjerstin. (2020). Integrating Survey Data and Digital Trace Data: Key Issues in Developing an Emerging Field. Social Science Computer Review 38, 5. pp. 503--516.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  67. Struminskaya, Bella, Lugtig, Peter, Keusch, Florian and Höhne, Jan Karem. (2020). Augmenting Surveys With Data From Sensors and Apps: Opportunities and Challenges. Social Science Computer Review. pp. 1--13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. Tangmunarunkit, Hongsuda, Hsieh, Cheng-Kang, Longstaff, Brent, Nolen, S, Jenkins, John, Ketcham, Cameron, Selsky, Joshua, Alquaddoomi, Faisal, George, Dony and Kang, Jinha. (2015). Ohmage: A General and Extensible End-to-End Participatory Sensing Platform. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (TIST) 6, 3. pp. Article 38, 01--21.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. Taylor, John T and Taylor, Wayne T. (2021). Software Architecture: Foundations, Theory, and Practice. Springer,Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. Teamscope. Teamscope: Data Collection App for Research | Secure, Offline. https://www.teamscopeapp.com/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. Thai, Sabrina and Page-Gould, Elizabeth. (Dec 2018). ExperienceSampler: An Open-Source Scaffold for Building Smartphone Apps for Experience Sampling. Psychological Methods 23, 4. pp. 729--739.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  72. Urbandroid Team. Don't Kill My App. https://dontkillmyapp.com/, 2022. (Accessed 3/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. Van Berkel, Niels, Ferreira, Denzil and Kostakos, Vassilis. (2017). The Experience Sampling Method on Mobile Devices. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 50, 6. pp. Article 93, 01--40.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. Van Berkel, Niels, Ferreira, Denzil and Kostakos, Vassilis. (Dec. 2017). The Experience Sampling Method on Mobile Devices. ACM Computing Surveys 50, 6. pp. 93:1--93:40.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. W3C. Geolocation API. https://www.w3.org/TR/geolocation/, 2022. (Accessed 2/1/2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. Wenz, Alexander, Jäckle, Annette, Burton, Jonathan and Couper, Mick P. (2022). The Effects of Personalized Feedback on Participation and Reporting in Mobile App Data Collection. Social Science Computer Review 40, 1. pp. 165--178.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  77. Xiong, Haoyi, Huang, Yu, Barnes, Laura E and Gerber, Matthew S. (2016). Sensus: A Cross-Platform, General-Purpose System for Mobile Crowdsensing in Human-Subject Studies. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (Heidelberg, Germany). Association for Computing Machinery. pp. 415--426.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. The Experience Sampling Method and its Tools: A Review for Developers, Study Administrators, and Participants

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
          Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction  Volume 7, Issue EICS
          EICS
          June 2023
          568 pages
          EISSN:2573-0142
          DOI:10.1145/3605541
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2023 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 19 June 2023
          Published in pacmhci Volume 7, Issue EICS

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader