Comparing responses in repeated cross-sectional and panel studies: Results across eight weeks during the first COVID-19 lockdown in Denmark
- Author(s)
- Ingo Zettler, Lau Lilleholt, Robert Böhm, Matthias Gondan
- Abstract
It is often important to study people's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors over time. To this end, researchers have relied on repeated cross-sectional (RCS) studies, in which different people from the same population participate on different measurement occasions. Also, researchers have relied on panel studies, in which the same group of people participate on different measurement occasions. However, few studies have directly tested whether participants' responses in RCS studies were similar to those found in panel studies. To address this gap, we compared the responses to 33 items, 28 of which were further grouped into four aggregates (Affections, Worries, States, Health concerns), over 8 weeks during the first COVID-19 lockdown in Denmark in a RCS study (overall N = 5,993, per measurement occasion 616
≤
n
≤
964)
with the
responses in a largely equivalent panel study (993
≤
n
≤
2,546 across
measurement occasions).
The study
participants were randomly drawn from the same quota-representative participant
pool and
responded to
the same items on the same measurement occasions. Results indicated a few
differences
between the
study samples on the
fi
rst
measurement occasion (i.e., selection effects between studies).
Further, we
found statistical support for different trajectories in 21 aggregates/items.
However, visual
inspection
of the trajectories suggested subtle differences between the studies at large.
The results thus raise
awareness
that the trajectories of people
’
s thoughts,
feelings, and behaviors can differ between survey
methods,
especially when only a few measurement occasions are considered. Nevertheless,
such differences
might not be
substantial over time.
- Organisation(s)
- External organisation(s)
- University of Copenhagen, Leopold-Franzens-Universität Innsbruck
- Journal
- Psychological Assessment
- Volume
- 33
- Pages
- 691-704
- No. of pages
- 14
- ISSN
- 1040-3590
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001048
- Publication date
- 08-2021
- Peer reviewed
- Yes
- Austrian Fields of Science 2012
- 501021 Social psychology
- Keywords
- ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Psychiatry and Mental health, Clinical Psychology
- Portal url
- https://ucrisportal.univie.ac.at/en/publications/9695a202-f78c-463e-a02a-e7213c27a6aa