PhD Study : Time is of the essence...or is it? An examination of time frame of reference in self-reported mental health questionnaires

Summary

Background to the project:

Common mental health problems such as depression and anxiety make a substantial contribution to the global disease burden (Whiteford et al., 2013), and research suggests that mental ill-health is rising at the level of the population (McElroy et al., 2022). As such, there is an increased emphasis on longitudinal and cross-national research into the causes and consequences of mental health problems. Most population mental health research relies on short, symptom-based questionnaires to assess mental ill-health in large samples. However, there is no “gold standard” measure, rather a range of questionnaires are used to screen for depression and anxiety in different studies. These questionnaires differ on many features – e.g. the specific symptoms assessed, reporting format (number of Likert categories).

There is increased interest in the equivalence of the most widely used questionnaires (McElroy et al., 2020). Understanding the equivalence of common mental health questionnaires is vital if we wish to compare research findings from different studies – i.e. if someone screens positive for depression based on a particular questionnaire, are they likely to be classified as depressed according to other instruments?

One aspect of questionnaires that has received remarkably little research is the time frame of reference. In simple terms – mental health questionnaires often ask people to report symptoms (e.g. “have you been experiencing low mood”) based on a set frame of time (e.g. “over the past week”). Common mental health questionnaires often differ in terms of the time-frame they use, and no research has investigated how differing time-frames may impact the reporting of symptoms.

Logically, longer time frames should result in more frequent/severe reporting of symptoms. However experimental cognitive work suggests that human memory is poor at locating emotional experiences within a fixed time frame, and that we are susceptible to recency biases (i.e. more likely to give greater weight to experiences that occurred more recently). It is unclear how these cognitive processes bias the reporting of mental health symptoms.

Objectives of the research:

To investigate the impact of different time-frames of reference on the frequency/severity with which people report mental health symptoms.

Methods to be used:

Between-subjects experimental design. Participants will be randomly allocated to groups. Each group will complete the same questionnaire to assess depression and anxiety, however the questionnaire instructions will differ for each group – each group will be asked about their symptoms over a different time period (e.g. “past week”, “past month”, “past six months”). A range of psychometric techniques (e.g. confirmatory factor analysis, multi-group factor analysis) will be used to compare the structure, reliability and mean scores of responses across the different groups.

Skills required of applicant:

Strong skills/interest in research methods and statistics.

Experience with experimental design.

Essential criteria

Applicants should hold, or expect to obtain, a First or Upper Second Class Honours Degree in a subject relevant to the proposed area of study.

We may also consider applications from those who hold equivalent qualifications, for example, a Lower Second Class Honours Degree plus a Master’s Degree with Distinction.

In exceptional circumstances, the University may consider a portfolio of evidence from applicants who have appropriate professional experience which is equivalent to the learning outcomes of an Honours degree in lieu of academic qualifications.

Funding and eligibility