An experience sampling method (ESM) rarely has been applied in studies of intimate partner violence (IPV) despite the benefits to be gained. Because ESM approaches and women who experience IPV present unique challenges for data collection, an empirical question exists: Is it safe and feasible to apply ESM to community women who currently are experiencing IPV? A 90-day, design-driven feasibility study examined daily telephone data collection, daily paper diaries, and monthly retrospective semistructured interview methods among a community sample of 123 women currently experiencing IPV to study within-person relationships between IPV and substance use. Findings suggest that ESM is a promising method for collecting data among this population and can elucidate daily dynamics of victimization as well as associated behaviors and experiences. Lessons learned from the application of ESM to this population are also discussed.
Black, M.C., Kresnow, M.-J., Simon, T.R., Arias, I., & Shelley, G. ( 2006). Telephone survey respondents’ reactions to questions regarding interpersonal violence. Violence and Victims, 21, 445-459.
2.
Campbell, R., Adams, A.E., Wasco, S.M., Ahrens, C.E., & Sefl, T. ( 2010). "What has it been like for you to talk with me today?" The impact of participating in interview research on rape survivors. Violence Against Women, 16, 60-83.
3.
Carlson, E.B., Newman, E., Daniels, J.W., Armstrong, J., Roth, D., & Loewenstein, R. (2003). Distress in response to and perceived usefulness of trauma research interviews. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 4, 131-142.
4.
Clements, K., & Holtzworth-Munroe, A. (2009). Participation in laboratory research results in emotional distress with one’s partner: Comparing violent and nonviolent couples (10.1007/ s10896-009-9229-4). Journal of Family Violence, 24, 283-295.
5.
Corkrey, R., & Parkinson, L. ( 2002). A comparison of four computer-based telephone interviewing methods: Getting answers to sensitive questions. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 34, 354-363.
6.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Larson, R. ( 1987). Validity and reliability of the experience-sampling method . Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease, 175, 526-536.
7.
Garcia-Moreno, C. ( 2002). Dilemmas and opportunities for an appropriate health-service response to violence against women. Lancet, 359, 1509.
8.
Griffin, M.G., Resick, P.A., Waldrop, A.E., & Mechanic, M.B. (2003). Participation in trauma research: Is there evidence of harm? Journal of Traumatic Stress, 16, 221-227.
9.
Hektner, J.M., Schmidt, J., A., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2007). Experience sampling method: Measuring the quality of everyday life. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
10.
Khantzian, E.J. ( 1997). The self-medication hypothesis of substance use disorders: A reconsideration and recent applications. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 4, 231-244.
11.
Khantzian, E.J. ( 2003). The self-medication hypothesis revisited: The dually diagnosed patient. Primary Psychiatry, 10(9), 47-48, 53-54.
12.
Langford, D.R. ( 2000). Developing a safety protocol in qualitative research involving battered women. Qualitative Health Research, 10, 133-142.
13.
Newman, E., & Kaloupek, D.G. (2004). The risks and benefits of participating in traumafocused research studies. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 17, 383-394.
14.
Newman, E., Walker, E.A., & Gefland, A. ( 1999). Assessing the ethical costs and benefits of trauma-focused research. General Hospital Psychiatry, 21, 187-196.
15.
Robinson, W.S. ( 1950). Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals . American Sociological Review, 15, 351-357.
16.
Rosenbaum, A., & Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J. (2006). Meta-research on violence and victims: The impact of data collection methods on findings and participants . Violence and Victims, 21, 404-409.
17.
Rosenbaum, A., Rabenhorst, M.M., Reddy, M.K., Fleming, M.T., & Howells, N.L. ( 2003, July). A comparison of methods for collecting self-report data on sensitive topics. Paper presented at the 8th International Family Violence Research Conference, Portsmouth, New Hampshire.
18.
Searles, J.S., Helzer, J.E., & Walter, D.E. ( 2000). Comparison of drinking patterns measured by daily reports and timeline follow back. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors , 14, 277-286.
19.
Searles, J.S., Perrine, M.W., Mundt, J.C., & Helzer, J.E. ( 1995). Self-report of drinking using touch-tone telephone: Extending the limits of reliable daily contact. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 56, 375-382.
Stone, A.A., & Shiffman, S. ( 2002). Capturing momentary, self-report data: A proposal for reporting guidelines. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 24, 236-243.
22.
Stone, A. A., Shiffman, S., Alienza, A. A., & Nebeling, L. (Eds.). (2007). The science of real-time data capture: Self-reports in health research. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
23.
Straus, M.A., Hamby, S.L., Boney-McCoy, S., & Sugarman, D.B. (1996). The revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2): Development and preliminary psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues, 17, 283-316.
24.
Todd, M., Armeli, S., Tennen, H., Carney, M.A., & Affleck, G. ( 2003). A daily diary validity test of drinking to cope measures . Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 17, 303-311.
25.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. ( 2001). Census 2000 Summary File 1/ Connecticut. Washington, DC: Author.
26.
Walker, E.A., Newman, E., Koss, M.P., & Bernstein, D. ( 1997). Does the study of victimization revictimize the victims ? General Hospital Psychiatry, 19, 403-410.
