Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR mHealth and uHealth

Date Submitted: Jul 16, 2024
Date Accepted: May 11, 2026

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Daily Negative Affect and Reaction Time Inconsistency in Emerging Adults: Ecological Momentary Assessment Study

Rutter LA, Chen PY, Lakhan P, Germine L, Hawks Z

Daily Negative Affect and Reaction Time Inconsistency in Emerging Adults: Ecological Momentary Assessment Study

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2026;14:e64397

DOI: 10.2196/64397

PMID: 42263241

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Daily negative affect and reaction time inconsistency in emerging adults: An ecological momentary assessment study

  • Lauren Alexandra Rutter; 
  • Pei-Ying Chen; 
  • Prabhvir Lakhan; 
  • Laura Germine; 
  • Zoe Hawks

ABSTRACT

Background:

Emotional disorders like depression and anxiety are characterized by high levels of negative affect (NA), frequent fluctuations in NA, and deficits in cognitive performance. College students are among the most vulnerable to emotional disorders.

Objective:

Despite recent advances in cognitive ecological momentary assessment (EMA), it remains unclear how daily experiences of NA impact momentary cognitive performance in emerging adults. Our primary objective was to test the hypothesis was that fluctuations in NA would be associated with RT inconsistency.

Methods:

Undergraduate and graduate students (N=99) completed an online baseline assessment as part of a 14-day EMA protocol. Baseline included self-report questionnaires measuring emotional disorder symptoms (neuroticism, anxiety, depression, insomnia) and a battery of cognitive tasks. Daily EMAs measured affect using the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule and cognition using a Choice Reaction Time (RT) task. We evaluated correlations among emotional disorder symptoms at baseline as a validity check. We ran multilevel models examining within- person associations between NA and trial-level RT inconsistency.

Results:

Between individuals, NA, neuroticism, depression, and anxiety symptoms were all positively and significantly correlated at baseline. Within individuals, greater NA predicted greater RT inconsistency, controlling for several demographic and clinical variables.

Conclusions:

Partially consistent with hypotheses, we observed greater RT inconsistency on days when NA was higher than usual. However, this main effect was moderated by practice effects, and within-person effect of NA on RT inconsistency diminished over time in the study. Results have implications for mental health and academic performance. Specifically, performance may be more inconsistent when individuals experience higher NA and stress. Clinical Trial: NA


 Citation

Please cite as:

Rutter LA, Chen PY, Lakhan P, Germine L, Hawks Z

Daily Negative Affect and Reaction Time Inconsistency in Emerging Adults: Ecological Momentary Assessment Study

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2026;14:e64397

DOI: 10.2196/64397

PMID: 42263241

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.