Skip to main content

Review of the Day Reconstruction Method (DRM)

Abstract

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Diener, E., Fujita, F., Tay, L., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2011). Purpose, mood, and pleasure in predicting satisfaction judgments. Social Indicators Research, 105, 333–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Diener, E., Inglehart, R., & Tay, L. (2012). The validity of life satisfaction measures. Social Indicators Research. doi:10.1007/s11205-012-0076-y.

  10. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Edwards, J. R. (2001). Ten difference score myths. Organizational Research Methods, 4, 265–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Fredrickson, B. L., & Kahneman, D. (1993). Duration neglect in retrospective evaluations of affective episodes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 45–55.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Grondin, S. (2001). From physical time to the first and second moments of psychological time. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 22–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 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.

  17. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 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.

    Google Scholar 

  20. 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.

    Google Scholar 

  21. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Krueger, A. B., & Schkade, D. A. (2008). The reliability of subjective well-being measures. Journal of Public Economics, 92, 1833–1845.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Metcalfe, J., & Mischel, W. (1999). A hot/cool system analysis of delay of gratification: Dynamics of willpower. Psychological Review, 106, 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Muchinsky, P. M. (1996). The correction for attenuation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 63–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Raento, M., Oulasvirta, A., & Eagle, N. (2009). Smartphones: An emerging tool for social scientists. Sociological Methods and Research, 37, 426–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Redelmeier, D. A., Katz, J., & Kahneman, D. (2003). Memories of colonoscopy: A randomized trial. Pain, 104, 187–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Scollon, C. N., Kim-Prieto, C., & Diener, E. (2003). Experience sampling: Promises and pitfalls, strengths and weaknesses. Journal of Happiness Studies, 4, 5–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Shiffman, S., Stone, A. A., & Hufford, M. R. (2008). Ecological momentary assessment. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 4, 1–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Thomas, D. L., & Diener, E. (1990). Memory accuracy in the recall of emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 291–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. White, M. P., & Dolan, P. (2009). Accounting for the richness of daily activities. Psychological Science, 20, 1000–1008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ed Diener.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Diener, E., Tay, L. Review of the Day Reconstruction Method (DRM). Soc Indic Res 116, 255–267 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-013-0279-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Subjective well-being
  • Happiness
  • Affect
  • Measurement
  • Day Reconstruction Method
  • Validity
  • Reliability
  • Ecological momentary assessment
  • Experience sampling