A systematic review and meta-analysis of discrepancies between logged and self-reported digital media use

There is widespread public and academic interest in understanding the uses and effects of digital media. Scholars primarily use self-report measures of the quantity or duration of media use as proxies for more objective measures, but the validity of these self-reports remains unclear. Advancements i...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Nature human behaviour Vol. 5; no. 11; pp. 1535 - 1547
Main Authors: Parry, Douglas A., Davidson, Brittany I., Sewall, Craig J. R., Fisher, Jacob T., Mieczkowski, Hannah, Quintana, Daniel S.
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: London Nature Publishing Group UK 01.11.2021
Nature Publishing Group
Subjects:
4014/4045
4014/477/2811
Behavioral Sciences
Biomedical and Life Sciences
Data collection
Digital broadcasting
Digital media
Discrepancies
Experimental Psychology
Humans
Indexing
Life Sciences
Mass media effects
Measures
Meta-analysis
Microeconomics
Neurosciences
Personality and Social Psychology
Reproducibility of Results
Screen Time
Self evaluation
Self report
Self Report - statistics & numerical data
Social Media - statistics & numerical data
Subjectivity
Systematic review
ISSN:2397-3374, 2397-3374
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:There is widespread public and academic interest in understanding the uses and effects of digital media. Scholars primarily use self-report measures of the quantity or duration of media use as proxies for more objective measures, but the validity of these self-reports remains unclear. Advancements in data collection techniques have produced a collection of studies indexing both self-reported and log-based measures. To assess the alignment between these measures, we conducted a pre-registered meta-analysis of this research. Based on 106 effect sizes, we found that self-reported media use correlates only moderately with logged measurements, that self-reports were rarely an accurate reflection of logged media use and that measures of problematic media use show an even weaker association with usage logs. These findings raise concerns about the validity of findings relying solely on self-reported measures of media use. In a pre-registered meta-analysis, Parry et al. find that, when self-reported media use is compared with digital logs of media use, subjective judgements are often inaccurate. This suggests caution when self-reports are used to test associations between media use and other outcomes.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
content type line 14
ObjectType-Feature-3
ObjectType-Evidence Based Healthcare-1
ObjectType-Article-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ObjectType-Undefined-3
ISSN:2397-3374
2397-3374
DOI:10.1038/s41562-021-01117-5