Measuring Adolescents’ Self-injurious Thoughts and Behaviors: Comparing Ecological Momentary Assessment to a Traditional Interview

The purpose of this study was to compare adolescents’ reports of self-injurious thoughts and behaviors (SITBs) between ecological momentary assessment (EMA) and a traditional, retrospective interview. Adolescents were recruited following recent discharge from acute psychiatric care for a suicidal crisis (as part of a larger study). Participants completed: (1) EMA surveys assessing SITBs multiple times daily over a 28-day follow-up period, and (2) a follow-up phone interview to evaluate SITBs retrospectively at the end of the same 28-day follow-up period. Forty-one adolescents completed the final follow-up interview (M_age = 14.9 years; 78.0% White; 61.0% female). Adolescents’ reports of SITB presence (vs. absence) and frequency, collected via EMA and retrospective interview over follow-up, were compared. Preliminary differences in SITB endorsement (presence/absence) were observed between reporting methods with more adolescents endorsing suicide ideation (SI; n = 30) and nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI; n = 15) in EMA compared to retrospective interview (SI: n = 17; NSSI: n = 10). Reasons for withholding SITBs from EMA reports (gathered during a final qualitative interview) included not wanting to answer additional EMA questions and concerns about EMA-reporting consequences. There were no statistically significant differences in SITB frequency by report method. Further investigation is warranted in a larger sample to elucidate frequency patterns. Given the growing research using this method, these findings are important to help clarify the utility of EMA methods for studying SITBs in youth.