Affect Dynamics or Response Bias? Extreme Response Style in Daily-Life Assessments

Intensive longitudinal data (ILD) are increasingly used to study affect dynamics such as intraindividual variability and inertia. These parameters are often interpreted as substantive individual differences, yet they may be biased by stable response style tendencies, in particiular extreme response style (ERS). In the present study, we investigated whether ERS is systematically associated with affect dynamics estimated from multiple experience sampling method (ESM) datasets (total N=1,254). Using a joint Bayesian IRTree–location–scale modeling approach, we estimated person-specific ERS alongside affective variability and inertia across multiple ESM datasets and synthesized study-level associations using a meta-analytic approach. We find that higher ERS is consistently associated with greater intraindividual variability. In contrast, we find no evidence that ERS was related to affective or emotional inertia. These results suggest that commonly used measures of intraindividual variability may partly reflect systematic response behavior rather than solely genuine affective fluctuations. Ignoring ERS may therefore bias variability estimates obtained from location–scale and related multilevel dynamic models. Overall, this study highlights the importance of accounting for response styles when modeling affect dynamics and interpreting person-specific variability parameters in ILD research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Multivariate Behavioral Research
Published
2026-09-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2026.2721527
Primary Topic
Mental Health Research Topics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

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

Affect Dynamics or Response Bias? Extreme Response Style in Daily-Life Assessments

Niels Vanhasbroeck, Francis Tuerlinckx, Mirka Henninger, Sandro Menegola
Multivariate Behavioral Research
Mental Health Research Topics
article

Affect Dynamics or Response Bias? Extreme Response Style in Daily-Life Assessments

Niels Vanhasbroeck, Francis Tuerlinckx, Mirka Henninger, Sandro Menegola
article en

Abstract

Intensive longitudinal data (ILD) are increasingly used to study affect dynamics such as intraindividual variability and inertia. These parameters are often interpreted as substantive individual differences, yet they may be biased by stable response style tendencies, in particiular extreme response style (ERS). In the present study, we investigated whether ERS is systematically associated with affect dynamics estimated from multiple experience sampling method (ESM) datasets (total N=1,254). Using a joint Bayesian IRTree–location–scale modeling approach, we estimated person-specific ERS alongside affective variability and inertia across multiple ESM datasets and synthesized study-level associations using a meta-analytic approach. We find that higher ERS is consistently associated with greater intraindividual variability. In contrast, we find no evidence that ERS was related to affective or emotional inertia. These results suggest that commonly used measures of intraindividual variability may partly reflect systematic response behavior rather than solely genuine affective fluctuations. Ignoring ERS may therefore bias variability estimates obtained from location–scale and related multilevel dynamic models. Overall, this study highlights the importance of accounting for response styles when modeling affect dynamics and interpreting person-specific variability parameters in ILD research.

Multivariate Behavioral Research
University of Basel (CH), Individual Differences (US), Hologic (Germany) (DE)
European Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Mental Health Research Topics
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.