Validity of the counter-app method in the assessment of intrusions

Martin Kollárik; Colette R Hirsch; Carlotta V Heinzel; Roselind Lieb; Karina Wahl

doi:10.1016/j.jbtep.2022.101775

Validity of the counter-app method in the assessment of intrusions

J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2022 Dec:77:101775. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2022.101775. Epub 2022 Sep 9.

Authors

Martin Kollárik¹, Colette R Hirsch², Carlotta V Heinzel¹, Roselind Lieb¹, Karina Wahl³

Affiliations

¹ Department of Psychology, Division of Clinical Psychology and Epidemiology, University of Basel, Switzerland.
² Psychology Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, United Kingdom & South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom.
³ Department of Psychology, Division of Clinical Psychology and Epidemiology, University of Basel, Switzerland. Electronic address: karina.wahl@unibas.ch.

PMID: 36113911
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2022.101775

Abstract

Background and objectives: The counter-app method is often used to assess the frequency of intrusions. The method requires the participants to press a button on a smartphone whenever an intrusion occurs during a predefined time period. We evaluated the convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity of the counter-app method in two studies.

Methods: In the first study, we assessed the frequency of intrusions with a counter-app method, thought-sampling method, and a retrospective measure in N = 77 students. Additionally, we assessed retrospectively-estimated duration, percentage of time, intensity, and intrusiveness of intrusions. The second study (N = 65) was identical to the first except the thinking-aloud method replaced the thought-sampling method, and additionally we assessed behavioral neutralizing.

Results: The counter-app frequency was positively correlated with the convergent (thought-sampling and thinking-aloud frequencies, and retrospectively-estimated frequencies of intrusions) and predictive (behavioral neutralizing) validity criteria. The correlations between counter-app frequency and discriminant validity criteria (retrospectively-estimated duration, percentage of time, intensity, and intrusiveness of intrusions) were not smaller than the correlations between counter-app frequency and convergent validity criteria.

Limitations: We evaluated the predictive validity of the counter-app method using a criterion typical of obsessive-compulsive disorder research. Thus, the result for predictive validity might not transfer to other areas.

Conclusions: Our findings support convergent and predictive, but not discriminant, validity of the counter-app method. The counter-app method can validly assess the frequency of intrusions but is not appropriate if the study requires the differentiation of frequency from other constructs such as duration.

Keywords: Counter app; Experimental study; Intrusions; Psychometric properties; Validity.

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Humans
Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder* / diagnosis
Reproducibility of Results
Retrospective Studies
Smartphone*
Students