Review of the Day Reconstruction Method (DRM)
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
The Day Reconstruction Method (DRM) for assessing daily experience and subjective well-being is reviewed. The DRM is a promising method as it assesses feelings within situations and activities, and therefore goes beyond asking who is happy to asking when they are happy. The technique might be less burdensome on respondents than experience-sampling, and might reduce memory biases that are inherent in global recall of feelings. However, evidence for the validity and reliability of the DRM is limited and is not entirely supportive. Research is needed on the psychometrics of the DRM, for example by comparing it to mobile phone assessments and other forms of experience-sampling, as well as to global reports of feelings in situations. Conceptual issues with computing overall subjective well-being by weighting a respondent’s activity scores by the time spent in them are discussed. Despite the promises of the DRM, the many unresolved issues with it and the alternative of using on-line electronic experience-sampling techniques suggest that more research is needed before the value of the DRM is established.
- Atz, U. (2012). Evaluating experience sampling of stress in a single-subject research design. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing. doi:10.1007/s00779-012-0512-7.
- Benjamin, D. J., Heffetz, O., Kimball, M. S., & Szembrot, N. (2012). Beyond happiness and satisfaction: Toward well-being indices based on stated preference. NBER Working Paper Number w18374. Also available at SSRN: http://ssm.com/abstract=2120784.
- Bylsma, L. M., Taylor-Clift, A., & Rottenberg, J. (2011). Emotional reactivity to daily events in major and minor depression. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 120, 155–167. CrossRef
- Cacioppo, J. T., & Bernston, G. G. (1994). Relationship between attitudes and evaluative space: A critical review, with emphasis on the separability of positive and negative substrates. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 401–423. CrossRef
- Courvoisier, D. S., Eid, M., & Lischetzke, T. (2012). Compliance to a cell-phone-based ecological momentary assessment study: The effect of time and personality characteristics. Psychological Assessment, 24, 713–720. CrossRef
- Courvoisier, D. S., Eid, M., Lischetzke, T., & Schreiber, W. H. (2010). Psychometric properties of a computerized mobile phone method for assessing mood in daily life. Emotion, 10, 115–124. CrossRef
- Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper and Row.
- Diener, E., Fujita, F., Tay, L., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2011). Purpose, mood, and pleasure in predicting satisfaction judgments. Social Indicators Research, 105, 333–341. CrossRef
- Diener, E., Inglehart, R., & Tay, L. (2012). The validity of life satisfaction measures. Social Indicators Research. doi:10.1007/s11205-012-0076-y.
- Diener, E., Ng, W., & Tov, W. (2009). Balance in life and declining marginal utility of diverse resources. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 3, 277–291. CrossRef
- Dockray, S., Grant, N., Stone, A. A., Kahneman, D., Wardle, J., & Steptoe, A. (2010). A comparison of affect ratings obtained with ecological momentary assessment and the day reconstruction method. Social Indicators Research, 99, 269–283. CrossRef
- Edwards, J. R. (2001). Ten difference score myths. Organizational Research Methods, 4, 265–287. CrossRef
- Fredrickson, B. L., & Kahneman, D. (1993). Duration neglect in retrospective evaluations of affective episodes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 45–55.
- Grondin, S. (2001). From physical time to the first and second moments of psychological time. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 22–44. CrossRef
- Grube, A., Schroer, J., Hentzschel, C., & Hertel, G. (2008). The event reconstruction method: An efficient measure of experience-based job satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 81, 669–689. CrossRef
- Kahneman, D. (1999). Objective happiness. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 3–25). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
- Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D. A., Schwarz, N., & Stone, A. A. (2004). A survey method for characterizing daily life experience: The day reconstruction method. Science, 1776, 1776–1780. CrossRef
- Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D. A., Schwarz, N., & Stone, A. A. (2006). Would you be happier if you were richer? A focusing illusion. Science, 312, 1908–1912. CrossRef
- Kahneman, D., & Riis, J. (2005). Living, and thinking about it: Two perspectives on life. In F. Huppert, N. Baylis, & B. Keverne (Eds.), The science of well-being (pp. 285–304). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
- Kahneman, D., Schkade, D. A., Fischler, C., Krueger, A. B., & Krilla, A. (2010). The structure of well-being in two cities: Life satisfaction and experienced happiness in Columbus, Ohio; and Rennes, France. In E. Diener, J. F. Helliwell, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), International differences in well-being. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Knabe, A., Rätzel, S., Schöb, R., & Weimann, J. (2010). Dissatisfied with life but having a good day: Time-use and wellbeing of the unemployed. Economic Journal, 120, 867–889. CrossRef
- Krueger, A. B., & Schkade, D. A. (2008). The reliability of subjective well-being measures. Journal of Public Economics, 92, 1833–1845. CrossRef
- Metcalfe, J., & Mischel, W. (1999). A hot/cool system analysis of delay of gratification: Dynamics of willpower. Psychological Review, 106, 3–19. CrossRef
- Muchinsky, P. M. (1996). The correction for attenuation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 63–75. CrossRef
- Oishi, S., Kurtz, J. L., Miao, F. F., Park, J., & Whitchurch, E. (2011). The role of familiarity in daily well-being: Developmental and cultural variation. Developmental Psychology, 47, 1750–1756. CrossRef
- Oishi, S., Whitchurch, E., Miao, F., Kurtz, J., & Park, J. (2009). “Would I be happier if I moved?” Retirement status and cultural variations in the anticipated and actual levels of happiness. Journal of Positive Psychology, 4, 437–446. CrossRef
- Peter, P. J., Churchill, G. A. J., & Brown, T. J. (1993). Caution in the use of difference scores in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 655–662. CrossRef
- Raento, M., Oulasvirta, A., & Eagle, N. (2009). Smartphones: An emerging tool for social scientists. Sociological Methods and Research, 37, 426–454. CrossRef
- Redelmeier, D. A., Katz, J., & Kahneman, D. (2003). Memories of colonoscopy: A randomized trial. Pain, 104, 187–194. CrossRef
- Scollon, C. N., Kim-Prieto, C., & Diener, E. (2003). Experience sampling: Promises and pitfalls, strengths and weaknesses. Journal of Happiness Studies, 4, 5–34. CrossRef
- Shiffman, S., Stone, A. A., & Hufford, M. R. (2008). Ecological momentary assessment. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 4, 1–32. CrossRef
- Stone, A. A., Schwartz, J. E., Schwarz, N., Schkade, D., Krueger, A., & Kahneman, D. (2006). A population approach to the study of emotion: Diurnal rhythms of a working day examined with the day reconstruction method. Emotion, 6, 139–149. CrossRef
- Thomas, D. L., & Diener, E. (1990). Memory accuracy in the recall of emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 291–297. CrossRef
- White, M. P., & Dolan, P. (2009). Accounting for the richness of daily activities. Psychological Science, 20, 1000–1008. CrossRef
- Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1271–1288. CrossRef
- Review of the Day Reconstruction Method (DRM)
Social Indicators Research
Volume 116, Issue 1 , pp 255-267
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Subjective well-being
- Day Reconstruction Method
- Ecological momentary assessment
- Experience sampling
- Industry Sectors