The DOI matches its Crossref record; 129 of the 129 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
ESM 2.0: State of the Art and Future Potential of Experience Sampling Methods in Organizational Research
Open accessAbstract
The use of experience sampling methods (ESM) and related techniques has exploded in organizational research. The goals of this review are to provide a focused perspective on the state of the art in using ESM and set the stage for what ESM will look like in the years to come. First, I provide a conceptually based discussion of exactly what is and what is not ESM. Next, I discuss the more advantageous elements of ESM that have surfaced from the range of disciplines that enjoy its use (e.g., reduced memory and methods biases), followed by the inevitable challenges that have sometimes limited its utility (e.g., issues with repeated assessment, missing data, and internal validity). Finally, I discuss three innovations of ESM (e.g., trait assessment, expansion to higher levels of analysis, and connection to big data) that seem likely to ensure its continued and expanded influence as a common tool for examining not only within-person psychological processes at work, but higher levels of analysis as well.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Utilizing ESM allows researchers to protect against common method bias usually associated with crosssectional survey designs and memory bias where followers have to recall specific behaviors (Beal, 2015).”
From Servant Leadership: A systematic review and call for future research (2019) · cites this paper as Beal, 2015
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Researchers typically employee ESM to survey participants regularly (i.e.every few hours up to daily) across 1 to 2 weeks (Beal, 2015).”
From Servant Leadership: A systematic review and call for future research (2019) · cites this paper as Beal, 2015
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 · Cited by 82,194
Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452 · Cited by 15,744
(2002) · Cited by 13,211
THE BIG FIVE PERSONALITY DIMENSIONS AND JOB PERFORMANCE: A META‐ANALYSIS
BARRICK, M. R., & MOUNT, M. K. (1991) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x · Cited by 8,689
Hamilton, J. D. (1994) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9780691218632 · Cited by 7,941
Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences.
Henry, N. W., Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. R. (1977) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2064799 · Cited by 7,242
Ecological momentary assessment
Shiffman, S., Stone, A. A., & Hufford, M. R. (2008) · Annual Review of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.3.022806.091415 · Cited by 6,454
Business intelligence and analytics: from big data to big impact
Chen, H., Chiang, R. H. L., & Storey, V. C. (2012) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/41703503 · Cited by 6,250
Missing data analysis: making it work in the real world
Graham, J. W. (2009) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085530 · Cited by 6,163
Centering predictor variables in cross-sectional multilevel models: A new look at an old issue.
Enders, C. K., & Tofighi, D. (2007) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.12.2.121 · Cited by 4,462
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- Beal DJ, 2013, A Day in the Life of a Happy Worker, 8
- Bobko P, 1998, Res. Pers. Hum. Resour. Manag., 16, 359
- Card NA. 2012. Multilevel mediational analysis in the study of daily lives. See Mehl & Conner 2012, pp. 479–98
- Damasio A, 1994, Descartes’ Error
- Hersey RB, 1932, Pers. J., 10, 355
- Laurila JK, Gatica-Perez D, Aad I, Blom J, Bornet O, et al. 2012. The Mobile Data Challenge: big data for mobile computing research. Presented at Mob. Data Chall. Workshop, June 18–19, Newcastle, UK
- Ployhart RE, 2010, J. Manag., 36, 94
- Taylor SG, 2015, J. Manag
- Weiss HM, 1996, Res. Organ. Behav., 19, 1
- Zyphur MJ, 2015, J. Manag, 41, 390
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Servant Leadership: A systematic review and call for future research
Eva, N., Robin, M., Sendjaya, S., van Dierendonck, D., & Liden, R. C. (2019) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.07.004 · Cited by 1,858
“Utilizing ESM allows researchers to protect against common method bias usually associated with crosssectional survey designs and memory bias where followers have to recall specific behaviors (Beal, 2015).”
BackgroundInfluentialHow Technology Is Changing Work and Organizations
Cascio, W. F., & Montealegre, R. (2016) · Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062352 · Cited by 1,442
Variable-Centered, Person-Centered, and Person-Specific Approaches: Where Theory Meets the Method
Howard, M. C., & Hoffman, M. E. (2018) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428117744021 · Cited by 1,121
Gabriel, A. S., Podsakoff, N. P., Beal, D. J., Scott, B. A., Sonnentag, S., Trougakos, J. P., & Butts, M. M. (2019) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428118802626 · Cited by 755
Self-citationWrzus, C., & Neubauer, A. B. (2023) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/10731911211067538 · Cited by 500
Metadata
- Authors
- Beal, D. J.
- Affiliations
- Virginia Tech (US)
- Corresponding author
- Beal, Daniel J.
- ORCID
- Beal, Daniel J.
- Venue
- Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 2015-04-10
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 383-407
- ISSN
- 2327-0608 (ISSN-L)
- 2327-0616
- OpenAlex
- W2106887764
- Cited by
- 436
- References
- 129
- Citations by year
- 2026: 49 · 2025: 63 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 52 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 4
- FWCI
- 2.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Workplace Health and Well-being
- Keywords
- ecological momentary assessment, within-person processes, memory bias, methodological bias, repeated assessment, missing data, internal validity, trait assessment, big data, work psychology
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
