Identifying Careless Responding in Ecological Momentary Assessment: Inconsistent Signals from Different Detection Methods in the WARN-D Data

Collecting intensive longitudinal data via methods like ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is necessary to study dynamics in psychological constructs. However, detecting careless responding is more important than ever, as this methodology burdens participants more than traditional single survey studies. If undetected, careless responding reduces data quality and can lead to invalid findings by distorting correlations between items and constructs and compromising the psychometric properties of scales. In turn, this hinders progress toward cumulative psychological science. In recent years, several data-driven approaches have been proposed that assess whether an individual was attentive or careless for each timepoint-specific measurement after data collection. However, the variety and complexity of available methods can be overwhelming for researchers. In this paper, we summarized, applied, and compared 13 methods that flag careless responses in a rich EMA dataset from the WARN-D study with 206,318 observations (from n = 1194 participants). Together with our detailed supplementary tutorials, the paper serves as a guide for researchers to evaluate and report careless responding in their own data. At the same time, we show that the development of methods for careless responding detection is still in its early stages, as the studied approaches produced very different results. We provide recommendations for which methods are currently most promising based on our findings and discuss important next steps in validating them empirically.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-09-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/4dfbz_v1
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Mental Health Research Topics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.12

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Identifying Careless Responding in Ecological Momentary Assessment: Inconsistent Signals from Different Detection Methods in the WARN-D Data

Peter Kuppens, Adam Klocek, Egon Dejonckheere, Ricarda K. K. Proppert et al.
1 citations
Mental Health Research Topics
2.12
article

Identifying Careless Responding in Ecological Momentary Assessment: Inconsistent Signals from Different Detection Methods in the WARN-D Data

Peter Kuppens, Adam Klocek, Egon Dejonckheere, Ricarda K. K. Proppert, Björn S. Siepe, Gudrun Vera Eisele, Carlotta Rieble, Joran Geeraerts, Rayyan Tutunji, Esther Ulitzsch, Leonie V. D. E. Vogelsmeier, Eiko I. Fried
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Collecting intensive longitudinal data via methods like ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is necessary to study dynamics in psychological constructs. However, detecting careless responding is more important than ever, as this methodology burdens participants more than traditional single survey studies. If undetected, careless responding reduces data quality and can lead to invalid findings by distorting correlations between items and constructs and compromising the psychometric properties of scales. In turn, this hinders progress toward cumulative psychological science. In recent years, several data-driven approaches have been proposed that assess whether an individual was attentive or careless for each timepoint-specific measurement after data collection. However, the variety and complexity of available methods can be overwhelming for researchers. In this paper, we summarized, applied, and compared 13 methods that flag careless responses in a rich EMA dataset from the WARN-D study with 206,318 observations (from n = 1194 participants). Together with our detailed supplementary tutorials, the paper serves as a guide for researchers to evaluate and report careless responding in their own data. At the same time, we show that the development of methods for careless responding detection is still in its early stages, as the studied approaches produced very different results. We provide recommendations for which methods are currently most promising based on our findings and discuss important next steps in validating them empirically.

KU Leuven (BE)
European Commission
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Mental Health Research Topics
2.12
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.