背景:时间使用上的性别差距及其对健康和福祉的影响仍然普遍存在。在考虑有偿和无偿的情况下,女性的工作时间比男性长(例如,托儿和家务)工作,这种性别差异在父母中尤为明显。对可能调解或缓和这种关系的因素知之甚少(例如,工作家庭冲突和性别角色信念)。生态瞬时评估(EMA)允许记录瞬时内部状态的变化,比如时间使用,压力,或心情。它已经显示出衡量短期活动的特别有效性(例如,无偿工作),因此对解决性别差异很有用。
目的:将检查在父母样本中进行每日EMA调查的可行性。时间使用之间的关联,幸福,压力将被检查,以及性别等潜在的调节和中介因素,性别角色信念,工作家庭冲突。最后,监控自己时间使用的行为,幸福,和压力将被检查,例如,生活质量。
方法:我们进行了准实验,3种数据收集方法的非随机对照试验,即,在线问卷调查,EMA调查,定性采访。干预组(n=64)将参与在线问卷和EMA调查,干预组的一个子样本(n=6-17)也将被邀请参加定性访谈。在一周的时间里,干预组参与者将回答每日EMA调查(每天4次).相比之下,对照组(n=17)仅在基线和1周后参与在线问卷.调查了以下结构:社会人口统计学背景(例如,年龄,性别,和家庭构成;基线问卷);调解员和主持人(例如,性别角色信念和工作家庭冲突;基线和后续问卷);幸福感,生活质量,和特质正念(基线和随访问卷);瞬时活动和幸福感,以及状态正念(EMA);和可行性(基线和随访问卷以及访谈)。我们预计参与者将认为每日EMA是可行的。特定的日常时间使用模式(例如,高薪和无偿工作量)预计与较低的幸福感有关,较高的压力,和健康相关的生活质量。这些关联预计将受到性别等因素的调节和调解,性别角色信念,工作-家庭冲突,和社会支持。干预组的参与者预计会表现出更高的正念价值,幸福,与健康相关的生活质量,和较低的压力。
结果:患者招募于2023年11月开始,至2024年4月中旬结束。数据分析于2024年4月中旬开始。
结论:这项研究旨在为使用EMA的可行性以及在日常生活各个方面进行活动跟踪的潜在好处提供有价值的见解。
背景:开放科学框架8qj3d;https://osf.io/8qj3d。
■PRR1-10.2196/54728。
BACKGROUND: The gender gap in time use and its impact on health and well-being are still prevalent. Women work longer hours than men when considering both paid and unpaid (eg, childcare and chores) work, and this gender disparity is particularly visible among parents. Less is known about factors that could potentially mediate or moderate this relationship (eg, work-family conflict and gender role beliefs). Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) allows for the documentation of changes in momentary internal states, such as time use, stress, or mood. It has shown particular validity to measure shorter-term activities (eg, unpaid work) and is thus useful to address gender differences.
OBJECTIVE: The feasibility of the daily EMA surveys in a parent sample will be examined. The associations between time use, well-being, and stress will be examined, along with potential moderating and mediating factors such as gender, gender role beliefs, and work-family conflict. Finally, the act of monitoring one\'s own time use, well-being, and stress will be examined in relation to, for example, the quality of life.
METHODS: We conducted a quasi-experimental, nonrandomized controlled trial with 3 data collection methods, namely, online questionnaires, EMA surveys, and qualitative interviews. The intervention group (n=64) will participate in the online questionnaires and EMA surveys, and a subsample of the intervention group (n=6-17) will also be invited to participate in qualitative interviews. Over a period of 1 week, participants in the intervention group will answer daily EMA surveys (4 times per day). In contrast, the control group (n=17) will only participate in the online questionnaires at baseline and after 1 week. The following constructs were surveyed: sociodemographic background (eg, age, gender, and household composition; baseline questionnaire); mediators and moderators (eg, gender role beliefs and work-family conflict; baseline and follow-up questionnaires); well-being, quality of life, and trait mindfulness (baseline and follow-up questionnaires); momentary activity and well-being, as well as state mindfulness (EMA); and feasibility (baseline and follow-up questionnaires as well as interviews). We anticipate that participants will regard the daily EMA as feasible. Particular daily time-use patterns (eg, high paid and unpaid workload) are expected to be related to lower well-being, higher stress, and health-related quality of life. These associations are expected to be moderated and mediated by factors such as gender, gender role beliefs, work-family conflict, and social support. Participants in the intervention group are expected to show higher values of mindfulness, well-being, health-related quality of life, and lower stress.
RESULTS: Patient recruitment started in November 2023 and ended in mid April 2024. Data analysis commenced in mid April 2024.
CONCLUSIONS: This study aims to provide valuable insights into the feasibility of using EMAs and the potential benefits of activity tracking in various aspects of daily life.
BACKGROUND: Open Science Framework 8qj3d; https://osf.io/8qj3d.
UNASSIGNED: PRR1-10.2196/54728.