Table 1
High-Level Overview of Measures per Phase of Data Collection.
| PHASE OF DATA COLLECTION | CONSTRUCT | MEASURE |
|---|---|---|
| Initial and final trait surveys | Basic personality traits |
|
| Narcissism |
| |
| Self-esteem |
| |
| Loneliness |
| |
| Political orientation |
| |
| Conspiracy mentality |
| |
| C19-related risk estimations | Self-generated measures | |
| C19-related worries | ||
| C19-related behavioral evaluations | ||
| C19-related behavioral changes | ||
| C19-related stockpiling | ||
| C19-related policy evaluations | ||
| Exposure to the coronavirus | ||
| C19-related personal restrictions | ||
| ESM (state) surveys | Interaction-specific measures |
|
| Non-social-activity-specific measures |
| |
| Interaction-unspecific measures | Overall affect valence and arousal | |
| Interaction-unspecific, C19-related worries a |
|
[i] Note: This table lists all measures administered in the initial and final trait surveys (i.e., T1 and T2 in S1W1 and S2W1; T3 and T4 in S1W2 and S2W2) as well as the ESM surveys per study wave (e.g., S1W1 [Study 1 Wave 1; all other study waves are abbreviated analogously]). C19 = COVID-19. Each measure is assigned to the construct it is supposed to assess. The initial and final trait surveys incorporated trait measures only, whereas the ESM surveys exclusively administered state measures. For a comprehensive delineation of every measure included in the EMOTIONS project (alongside its respective German and English source), please refer to Section 2.5 and/or the study-wave-specific codebooks (osf.io/6kzx3/).
a Some COVID-19-related behavioral, perceptual, and emotional states were added in Study 2.
Figure 1
EMOTIONS Project Timeline Including Terminology and Central COVID-19 Events.
Note: This table provides an overview of the entire EMOTIONS project, including both studies (Study 1 and 2) and each study’s waves. S1W1 = Study 1 Wave 1 (all other waves are abbreviated analogously), T1 = time point 1 (initial trait survey of both studies’ respective first wave), T2 = time point 2 (final trait survey of both studies’ respective first wave), T3 = time point 3 (initial trait survey of both studies’ respective second wave), T4 = time point 4 (final trait survey of both studies’ respective second wave), NRW = North Rhine-Westphalia. Date format: DD/MM/YYYY. For study-wave-specific timelines, see each study wave’s respective codebook on osf.io/6kzx3/.
Table 2
Number of Excluded Observations in the Trait and State Data Sets per EMOTIONS Study Wave.
| STUDY 1 | STUDY 2 | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| STUDY WAVE | S1W1 | S1W2 | S2W1 | S2W2 | ||||||||
| DATA SET | TRAIT | STATE | TRAIT | STATE | TRAIT | STATE | TRAIT | STATE | ||||
| PARTICIPANTS | PARTICIPANTS | STATE REPORTS | PARTICIPANTS | PARTICIPANTS | STATE REPORTS | PARTICIPANTS | PARTICIPANTS | STATE REPORTS | PARTICIPANTS | PARTICIPANTS | STATE REPORTS | |
| Number of observations before data exclusion | 2,938 | 2,938 | 20,639 | 1,480 | 1,480 | 13,590 | 12,016 | 12,016 | 53,792 | 6,004 | 6,004 | 29,969 |
| Data exclusion criterion | ||||||||||||
| (a) Disagreement with the conditions of participation a | 2,482 | 2,482 | 2,482 | 1,242 | 1,242 | 1,242 | 8,941 | 8,941 | 8,941 | 4,314 | 4,314 | 4,314 |
| (b) Missing data on relevant variables | 52 | 52 | 52 | 23 | 23 | 23 | 470 | 470 | 470 | 270 | 270 | 270 |
| (c) Under minimum age | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| (d) Test users | 2 | 2 | 37 | 1 b | 1 b | 47 b | 1 | 1 | 43 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| (e) Duplicates | 49 | 49 | 223 | 11 | 11 | 94 | 89 | 89 | 269 | 66 | 66 | 66 |
| (f) State surveys erroneously dispatched during the night* | 38 | 65 | ||||||||||
| (g) Expired state surveys* | 2 | 269 | 10 | 136 | 870 | 3,072 | 440 | 1,499 | ||||
| (h) State surveys dispatched too close to each other* | 0 | 47 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 4 | ||||
| Total number of excluded observations | 2,585 | 2,625 | 3,175 | 1,277 | 1,287 | 1,542 | 9,501 | 10,371 | 12,798 | 4,650 | 5,090 | 6,153 |
| Total number of retained observations after data exclusion | 353 | 313 | 17,464 | 203 | 193 | 12,048 | 2,515 | 1,645 | 40,994 | 1,354 | 914 | 23,816 |
[i] Note: This table presents the criterion-specific and total number of observations removed from the trait and state data sets of the EMOTIONS project as well as each data set’s total number of retained observations after data exclusion. S1W1 = Study 1 Wave 1 (all other waves are abbreviated analogously). Exclusion criteria were applied in the order in which they are presented in this table. This means that for instance, duplicates (i.e., criterion [e]) were excluded from a data set to which all previous data exclusion criteria (i.e., [a] to [d]) had already been applied. Exclusion criteria that were uniquely applied to state data are marked with an asterisk (*). Age (just as any other socio-demographic variable) was not assessed in S1W2. Hence, criterion (c) could not be applied to the trait and state data set of S1W2. Criterion (f) was relevant for S1W1 only. Note that participants who were excluded according to criteria (a), (b), and (c) could not participate in the ESM phase of data collection. Consequently, from each state data set, there were as many (empty) state reports as participants deleted on these three criteria (e.g., 2,842 participants and state reports—i.e., empty rows in the state data set—were excluded on criterion [a] in S1W1).
a Participants could not deliberately disagree with the conditions of participation. Instead, not checking the box “I agree to the conditions of participation” (i.e., the only response option given on the consent item) lead to being excluded from continued study completion.
b There were no test users in S1W2. Instead, one participant explicitly requested to be excluded from the data sets.
Figure 2
Longitudinal Trajectories of Daily Numbers of ESM Reports and Participants in S1W1.
Note: This figure shows how many ESM surveys (blue line) were completed by how many participants (yellow line) per day during the ESM phase of S1W1 (Study 1 Wave 1), that is, from January 14, 2020, until April 17, 2020. ESM report = completed ESM survey. Date format: DD/MM/YYYY. Statistics are based on the respective study wave’s state data set.
Figure 3
Longitudinal Trajectories of Daily Numbers of ESM Reports and Participants in S1W2.
Note: This figure shows how many ESM surveys (blue line) were completed by how many participants (yellow line) per day during the ESM phase of S1W2 (Study 1 Wave 2), that is, from March 17, 2020, until April 18, 2020. ESM report = completed ESM survey. Date format: DD/MM/YYYY. Statistics are based on the respective study wave’s state data set.
Figure 4
Longitudinal Trajectories of Daily Numbers of ESM Reports and Participants in S2W1.
Note: This figure shows how many ESM surveys (blue line) were completed by how many participants (yellow line) per day during the ESM phase of S2W1 (Study 2 Wave 1), that is, from March 19, 2020, until April 25, 2020. ESM report = completed ESM survey. Date format: DD/MM/YYYY. Statistics are based on the respective study wave’s state data set.
Figure 5
Longitudinal Trajectories of Daily Numbers of ESM Reports and Participants in S2W2.
Note: This figure shows how many ESM surveys (blue line) were completed by how many participants (yellow line) per day during the ESM phase of S2W2 (Study 2 Wave 2), that is, from May 14, 2020, until June 14, 2020. ESM report = completed ESM survey. Date format: DD/MM/YYYY. Statistics are based on the respective study wave’s state data set. Please note that no state data was generated beyond June 14, 2020, but that the last possible day to complete the final trait survey was June 16, 2020 (cf. Figure 1 in Section 2.1).
Table 3
Descriptive Statistics on ESM Reports and ESM Days per Participant and Study Wave.
| NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS | NUMBER OF STATE REPORTS | ESM REPORTS PER PARTICIPANT/ESM DAYS PER PARTICIPANT | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | MDN | SD | RANGE | |||
| S1W1 | 313 | 17,464 | 55.8/12.1 | 65/14 | 25.2/4.0 | 1–97/1–16 |
| S1W2 | 193 | 12,048 | 62.4/12.9 | 71/14 | 23.2/3.5 | 1–88/1–16 |
| S2W1 | 1,645 | 40,994 | 24.9/7.8 | 15/7 | 24.3/5.3 | 1–88/1–15 |
| S2W2 | 914 | 23,816 | 26.1/8.4 | 19/9 | 23.0/5.0 | 1–84/1–14 |
[i] Note: This table presents means, medians, standard deviations, and ranges pertaining to the number of ESM reports (i.e., completed ESM surveys) and the number of completed ESM days per participant and study wave. S1W1 = Study 1 Wave 1 (all other waves are abbreviated analogously), Mdn = median. Statistics are based on the respective study wave’s state data set.
Table 4
Number of Observations in Merged EMOTIONS Data Sets.
| STUDY 1 | STUDY 2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Trait data set | Participants from both study waves incl. Wave 1 and 2 only | Ntotal = 370 Nboth = 186 NS1W1 only = 167 NS1W2 only = 17 | Ntotal = 3,565 Nboth = 304 NS2W1 only = 2,211 NS2W2 only = 1,050 |
| State data set | Participants from both study waves incl. Wave 1 and 2 only | Nparticipants total = 327 Nparticipants both = 179 Nparticipants S1W1 only = 134 Nparticipants S1W2 only = 14 | Nparticipants total = 2,272 Nparticipants both = 287 Nparticipants S2W1 only = 1,358 Nparticipants S2W2 only = 627 |
| State reports from both study waves incl. Wave 1 and 2 only | Nstate reports total = 29,512 Nstate reports both = 22,903 Nstate reports S1W1 only = 5,749 Nstate reports S1W2 only = 860 | Nstate reports total = 64,810 Nstate reports both = 22,284 Nstate reports S2W1 only = 27,931 Nstate reports S2W2 only = 14,595 |
[i] Note: This table shows the number of participants and—for the state data sets—state reports included in every merged data set. Data sets were merged based on identical emails and/or identical participant codes.
Table 5
Socio-Demographic Sample Information Based on the Trait Data Set per EMOTIONS Study Wave.
| SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLE | STUDY WAVE | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| S1W1 | S2W1 | S2W2 | |
| Gender (% female) | 78.2 | 75.9 | 80.6 |
| Age in years (M, Mdn, SD, range) | 23.0, 21, 6.8, 16–67 | 33.2, 30, 12.6, 16–99 | 41.0, 40, 12.4, 16–75 |
| Educational status (% general qualification for university entrance, % higher education degree) a | 80, 18 | 35, 47 | 28, 48 |
| Occupational status (% at university, % currently employed) b | 92, 7 | 34, 51 | 11, 69 |
| Current enrollment in higher education (% currently enrolled) c | 95 | 37 | 13 |
| Part-time job (% yes) d | 64 | 66 | |
| Household size (M, Mdn, SD, range) e | 2.7, 2, 2.7, 1–99 | 2.5, 2, 2.7, 1–90 | |
| Relationship status (% single) f | 33 | 28 | |
[i] Note: This table presents socio-demographic sample information based on the trait data set per EMOTIONS wave. S1W1 = Study 1 Wave 1 (all other waves are abbreviated analogously), Mdn = median. Number of participants who provided data on all socio-demographic variables per study wave: nS1W1 = 353, nS2W1 = 2,515, nS2W2 = 1,354. For each socio-demographic sample information, reported statistics are specified in parentheses. Empty cells indicate that the variable in question was not administered in the respective study wave. Note that no socio-demographic information were assessed in S1W2. For full response formats, see our comprehensive codebooks on OSF (osf.io/6kzx3/); and for details on outlier inspection, see Section 2.6.
a General qualification for university entrance subsumed two response options: 6 (general qualification for university entrance with no additional vocational training), 7 (general qualification for university entrance plus vocational training). Higher education degree subsumed three response options: 8 (university of applied sciences degree), 9 (university degree), 10 (university degree and PhD).
b Currently employed subsumed three response options: 5 (full-time employment), 6 (part-time employment), 7 (self-employed).
c Currently enrolled subsumed two response options: 1 (yes, at a university), 2 (yes, at a university of applied sciences).
d Part-time job was assessed from T1 of S2W1 onwards. Moreover, it was displayed only if a participant reported being enrolled in higher education (i.e., at a university or a university of applied sciences), resulting in nS2W1 = 916, nS2W2 = 178 on this variable.
e Household size was assessed from T1 of S2W1 onwards.
f Relationship status was assessed from T2 of S2W1 onwards, resulting in nS2W1 = 945 on this variable. Moreover, due to drop-out, 1,351 participants provided data on their relationship status in S2W2.
Table 6
Established Trait Measures in EMOTIONS Study 1 (With Statistics Based on Trait Data Sets).
| MEASURE, TOTAL NUMBER OF ITEMS, RESPONSE FORMAT, SOURCES (GERMAN, ENGLISH) | SUBSCALE (NUMBER OF ITEMS PER SUBSCALE, IF APPLICABLE) | M (SD), ω, n | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1W1 | S1W2 | ||||
| T1 | T2 | T4 | |||
Interpersonal Adjective Scales (IAL a) + neuroticism-related items
| PA (8) | 3.23 (0.63), .82, 335 | 3.31 (0.67), .84, 267 | 3.30 (0.69), .83, 170 | |
| BC (8) | 2.44 (0.67), .79, 336 | 2.40 (0.66), .78, 267 | 2.40 (0.66), .79, 170 | ||
| DE (8) | 1.60 (0.50), .78, 335 | 1.56 (0.48), .76, 267 | 1.52 (0.51), .82, 170 | ||
| FG (8) | 2.32 (0.66), .82, 335 | 2.26 (0.72), .86, 267 | 2.24 (0.73), .86, 170 | ||
| HI (8) | 2.72 (0.73), .81, 335 | 2.67 (0.75), .82, 267 | 2.68 (0.77), .83, 170 | ||
| JK (8) | 3.20 (0.54), .72, 335 | 3.21 (0.54), .73, 267 | 3.23 (0.58), .77, 170 | ||
| LM (8) | 4.11 (0.53), .82, 335 | 4.14 (0.50), .81, 267 | 4.15 (0.50), .79, 170 | ||
| NO (8) | 3.84 (0.54), .81, 335 | 3.88 (0.58), .84, 267 | 3.89 (0.55), .82, 170 | ||
| Neuroticism (16) | 2.92 (0.62), .89, 335 | 2.78 (0.62), .89, 267 | 2.73 (0.60), .88, 170 | ||
Narcissistic Admiration and Rivalry Questionnaire (NARQ)
| Admiration (9) | 3.12 (0.78), .85, 332 | 3.14 (0.80), .87, 266 | 3.14 (0.83), .89, 170 | |
| Rivalry (9) | 2.14 (0.74), .84, 332 | 2.04 (0.74), .85, 266 | 2.06 (0.77), .87, 170 | ||
Hypersensitive Narcissism Scale (HSNS)
| 2.84 (0.49), .49, 328 | 2.85 (0.52), .56, 265 | 2.84 (0.46), .31, 168 | ||
| Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) | 2.97 (0.52), .89, 332 | 3.03 (0.52), .89, 266 | 3.06 (0.56), .92, 168 | ||
[i] Note: This table shows every established trait measure employed in both waves of Study 1 of the EMOTIONS project, with all descriptive statistics being calculated on the basis of the respective study wave’s trait data set. ω = McDonald’s omega, n = number of participants who provided data on all items per (sub-) scale, S1W1 = Study 1 Wave 1, S1W2 = Study 1 Wave 2. No established trait measures were assessed at T3 of S1W2. Thus, this time point is omitted from this table. For full sources and the order of assessment, please refer to this paper’s reference list and/or the study-wave-specific codebooks. Each codebook offers the most detailed and chronological transcript of every EMOTIONS wave (incl. all instructions, item wordings, and response formats) and can be retrieved from osf.io/6kzx3/.
Table 7
Established Trait Measures in EMOTIONS Study 2 (With Statistics Based on Trait Data Sets).
| MEASURE, TOTAL NUMBER OF ITEMS, RESPONSE FORMAT, SOURCES (GERMAN, ENGLISH) | SUBSCALE (NUMBER OF ITEMS PER SUBSCALE, IF APPLICABLE) | M (SD), ω, n | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S2W1 | S2W2 | |||||
| T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | |||
| Big Five Inventory-2-S (BFI-2-S) • 30 items • 1 (Disagree strongly); 2 (Disagree a little); 3 (Neutral; no opinion); 4 (Agree strongly); 5 (Agree strongly) • German version: Rammstedt et al. (2020) • English version: Soto & John (2017) | Negative Emotionality (6) | 2.74 (0.74), .81, 2,358 | 2.67 (0.77), .83, 937 | 2.79 (0.76), .82, 1,299 | 2.72 (0.80), .84, 627 | |
| Extraversion (6) | 3.31 (0.66), .74, 2,358 | 3.21 (0.66), .74, 937 | 3.17 (0.67), .74, 1,299 | 3.12 (0.65), .74, 627 | ||
| Open-Mindedness (6) | 3.63 (0.69), .72, 2,358 | 3.68 (0.73), .76, 937 | 3.63 (0.72), .75, 1,299 | 3.71 (0.78), .77, 627 | ||
| Agreeableness (6) | 3.85 (0.55), .67, 2,358 | 3.87 (0.57), .71, 937 | 3.79 (0.56), .69, 1,299 | 3.86 (0.54), .67, 627 | ||
| Conscientiousness (6) | 3.70 (0.65), .77, 2,358 | 3.69 (0.67), .80, 937 | 3.60 (0.65), .78, 1,299 | 3.62 (0.66), .80, 627 | ||
| Honesty-Humility (subscale from the HEXACO-60) • 10 items • 1 (strongly disagree); 2 (disagree); 3 (neutral); 4 (agree) 5 (strongly agree) • German and English version: Ashton & Lee (2009) | 3.74 (0.55), .62, 920 | 3.74 (0.54), .59, 1,221 | 3.78 (0.56), .60, 616 | |||
Narcissistic Admiration and Rivalry Questionnaire Short Scale (NARQ-S)
| Admiration (3) | 2.65 (1.03), .78, 2,317 | 2.54 (1.05), .80, 931 | 2.57 (1.04), .78, 1,279 | 2.39 (1.04), .81, 623 | |
| Rivalry (3) | 2.10 (0.81), .64, 2,317 | 2.02 (0.84), .67, 931 | 2.09 (0.82), .64, 1,279 | 1.96 (0.79), .63, 623 | ||
| Single self-esteem item (from the RSES) | 6.83 (1.87), 2,317 | 6.93 (1.84), 931 | 6.60 (2.05), 1,279 | 6.69 (2.02), 623 | ||
UCLA Loneliness Scale (ULS)
| 2.45 (0.63), 2,281 | 2.47 (0.63), .87, 929 | 2.63 (0.65), .88, 1,262 | 2.57 (0.64), .89, 621 | ||
| Political orientation • 1 item • 1 (Left) – 11 (Right) • German version: Kroh (2007) • No English version available | 4.33 (1.81), 927 | 4.46 (1.93), 1,245 | 4.33 (1.79), 620 | |||
Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire (CMQ)
| 5.19 (2.10), .86, 927 | 5.04 (2.28), .87, 1,245 | 4.66 (2.13), .87, 620 | |||
[i] Note: This table shows every established trait measure employed in both waves of Study 2 of the EMOTIONS project, with all descriptive statistics being calculated on the basis of the respective study wave’s trait data set. ω = McDonald’s omega, n = number of participants who provided data on all items per (sub-) scale, S2W1 = Study 2 Wave 1, S2W2 = Study 2 Wave 2. An empty cell indicates that the measure was not assessed at the designated time point. McDonald’s omega could not be computed for single-item measures (i.e., single self-esteem item, political orientation). For full sources and the order of assessment, please refer to this paper’s reference list and/or the study-wave-specific codebooks. Each codebook offers the most detailed and chronological transcript of every EMOTIONS wave (incl. all instructions, item wordings, and response formats) and can be retrieved from osf.io/6kzx3/.
Table 8
Self-Generated, COVID-19-Related Trait Measures of the EMOTIONS Project.
| MEASURE | NUMBER OF ITEMS | WHAT WAS MEASURED? | RESPONSE FORMAT | S1W2 | S2W1 | S2W2 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T3 | T4 | T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | ||||||
| Coronavirus-related risk estimations | Rating scale: 1 (Very low) – 6 (Very high) | ||||||||||
| Self-related risk estimations | 3 | Estimated risk of the coronavirus for personal health, social life, and work/university studies | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Family-related risk estimations | 3 | Estimated risk of the coronavirus for family’s (i.e., parents, grandparents, siblings) health, social life, and working life/university studies | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Close-others-related risk estimations | 3 | Estimated risk of the coronavirus for close others’ (i.e., partner, close friends) health, social life, and working life/university studies | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Society-related risk estimations | 4 | Estimated risk of the coronavirus for the healthcare system, social cohesion, economy/working life, and cultural life | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Coronavirus-related worries | Rating scale: 1 (Does not apply at all) – 6 (Applies completely) | ||||||||||
| Personal worries | 3 | Assessment of personal worries due to the coronavirus and its containment (e.g., oneself being anxious/worried) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Others’ worries | 3 | Assessment of other people’s worries due to the coronavirus and its containment (e.g., others being anxious/worried) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Coronavirus-related behavioral evaluations | Rating scale: 1 (Does not apply at all) – 6 (Applies completely) | ||||||||||
| General behavioral evaluations | 4 | Evaluation of the appropriateness of governmental crisis management, people’s panic, journalists’ reporting, and the discussion on social media | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Self-related behavioral evaluations | 5 | Evaluation of personal behaviors regarding the coronavirus and its containment (e.g., oneself acting with caution) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Personal hope and belief in social cohesion | 2 | Assessment of the beliefs that “we as society can get the situation under control” and that one is “in the same boat as everyone else” | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Other-related behavioral evaluations | 5 | Evaluation of other people’s behaviors regarding the coronavirus and its containment (e.g., others acting with caution) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Coronavirus-related behavioral changes | Assessment of engaging less, equally, or more often than before the coronavirus crisis in behaviors including: | Rating scale: 1 (Significantly less often) – 4 (Equally often) – 7 (Significantly more often) | |||||||||
| Hygiene-related behavioral changes | 2 | Washing hands, sneezing/coughing into the crook of one’s arm | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Social-distancing-related behavioral changes | 4 | Keeping distance to other people, grocery shopping in supermarkets, visiting public places (e.g., markets, shopping centers), staying at home | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Travel- and transportation-related behavioral changes | 3 | Going on planned trips, riding one’s bike, using public transport | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Leisure-related behavioral changes | 13 | Visiting family, meeting up with friends, attending public events with more/less than 50 persons, attending private meetings with more/less than 10 persons, inviting people to one’s home, going to nightclubs/cafes, visiting cultural facilities (e.g., museums, cinemas), going to a fitness studio/for a walk/jogging outside | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Work-related behavioral changes | 3 | Working/studying at home, studying in the library, sitting for exams | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Coronavirus-related stockpiling | 2 | Number of toilet paper rolls and packages of pasta currently in one’s household | Integer | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| Coronavirus-related policy evaluations | Evaluation of the appropriateness of policies regarding the … | Rating scale: 1 (Not sensible at all) – 6 (Extremely sensible) | |||||||||
| Evaluation of policies regarding events | 3 | … cancellation of different-sized events (e.g., large-scale events, private events with more than 50 persons) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Evaluation of policies regarding travel as well as (local and long-distance) public transport | 7 | … discontinuation of public transport (e.g., local public transport service, short- and long-haul air travel) and travel bans (e.g., border closures for people seeking to enter the country, ban on travelling abroad) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Evaluation of policies regarding educational institutions | 3 | … closure of (nursery) schools and higher education institutions | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Evaluation of policies regarding cultural life | 3 | … closure of cultural institutions including nightclubs, bars/cafés, museums, or sports facilities | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Evaluation of policies regarding retail | 1 | … of retail stores with the exception of supermarkets, drugstores, and pharmacies | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Evaluation of policies regarding quarantine and rationing of essential goods | 3 | … imposition of quarantine and rationing/seizure-of-essential-goods regulations | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Evaluation of policies regarding the relaxation of restrictions | 1 | Evaluation whether restrictions are being relaxed with appropriate speed | Rating scale: 1 (Way too slowly) – 7 (Way too fast) | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| Exposure to the coronavirus | |||||||||||
| Self-related exposure | 5 in S1W2, 8 starting with S2W1 T1 | Personal exposure to the coronavirus in terms of being in (voluntary or prescribed) quarantine, having/having had typical symptoms of the disease, and having been tested (positive) Additionally since S2W1 T1: Personal exposure in terms of following social distancing measures, thinking that one or more people from one’s household belong to risk group, and different degrees of being able to pursue one’s occupation/part-time job | Select one: 1 (Yes); 2 (No) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| Family-related exposure | 5 in S1W2, 3 starting with S2W1 T1 | Number of people in one’s family (i.e., parents, grandparents, siblings) being in (voluntary or prescribed) quarantine, reporting symptoms, and having been tested (positive) Since S2W1 T1: Only number of people in one’s family being in quarantine (no differentiation between prescribed and voluntary quarantine), and having been tested (positive) | Integer | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| Close-others-related exposure | 5 in S1W2, 3 starting with S2W1 T1 | Number of people in one’s close personal environment (i.e., partner, close friends) being in (voluntary or prescribed) quarantine, reporting symptoms, and having been tested (positive) Since S2W1 T1: Only number of people in one’s close personal environment being in quarantine (no differentiation between prescribed and voluntary quarantine), and having been tested (positive) | Integer | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| Wider-social-environment-related exposure | 5 in S1W2, 3 starting with S2W1 T1 | Number of people in one’s wider social environment (i.e., fellow university students, other acquaintances) being in quarantine, reporting symptoms, and having been tested (positive) Since S2W1 T1: Only number of people in one’s wider social environment being in quarantine (no differentiation between prescribed and voluntary quarantine), and having been tested (positive) | Integer | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| Coronavirus-related personal restrictions | 4 | Assessment of the degree to which one is willing to accept personal quality of life constraints to reduce the risk of infection for oneself, one’s family members/friends, others in general, and members of the risk group | Rating scale: 1 (Disagree strongly) – 5 (Agree strongly) | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
[i] Note: This table presents all self-generated, COVID-19-related trait measures employed in the EMOTIONS project, organized into self-construed item sets. Each item set is accompanied by the number of (self-generated) items it subsumes, an overview of what it measured, and its response format. In addition, a check mark (✓) indicates that the item set was assessed at the designated time point, whereas a cross (✗) indicates that the item set was not assessed at the designated time point. No self-generated, COVID-19-related trait items were administered in S1W1. Thus, this wave is omitted from this table. Number of participants who provided data on all self-generated, COVID-19-related trait measures per study wave and time point in the trait data set (number of participants in the respective state data set given in parentheses): nS1W2 T3 = 201 (193), nS1W2 T4 = 170 (170), nS2W1 T1 = 2,097 (1,645), nS2W1 T2 = 945 (942), nS2W2 T3 = 1,132 (914), nS2W2 T4 = 634 (629). For item-specific information, instructions, and the order of assessment, please refer to the study-wave-specific codebooks. Each codebook offers the most detailed and chronological transcript of every EMOTIONS wave (incl. all instructions, item wordings, and response formats) and can be retrieved from osf.io/6kzx3/.
Table 9
State Measures of the EMOTIONS Project.
| MEASURE | INSTRUCTION AND ITEM | RESPONSE FORMAT |
|---|---|---|
| Interaction occurred? | Since the last survey, I (at least) had one social interaction that lasted longer than 5 minutes. | Select one: 1 (Yes); 2 (No) |
| If interaction | ||
| Type of activity | During what type of activity did the interaction take place? | Select one: 1 (job-related task/chore); 2 (private task/chore); 3 (leisure activity) |
| Mode of communication | The interaction evaluated here took place as follows: | Select one: 1 (directly/in person); 2 (via phone/chat) |
| Number of interaction partners | How many people other than you were involved in the interaction? Please enter 5 if you interacted with more than 5 people. In this case, please refer below to the five people with whom you interacted the most. | Select one: 1 – 5 |
| Relationship to each interaction partner | Now, for each of the involved interaction partners, please indicate what role he/she had in relation to you. If you interacted with more than 5 people, please report on the 5 most important people in the interaction. This interaction partner in the situation has the following relationship to me: | Select one: 1 (Supervisor); 2 (My employee); 3 (Co-worker); 4 (Customer client patient); 5 (Friend/acquaintance); 6 (Partner); 7 (My child); 8 (Parent); 9 (Sibling); 10 (other relatives); 11 (other persons) |
| Behavioral states | During the interaction, I exhibited the following behavior: | Rating scale: 1 (Does not apply at all) – 6 (Applies completely) |
| I took the lead. | ||
| I criticized others. | ||
| I did not get involved. | ||
| I was self-assured. | ||
| I was unfriendly. | ||
| I was reserved. | ||
| I raised the topic of the coronavirus.† | ||
| I helped others.† | ||
| Perceptual states | During the interaction, I perceived the following: | Rating scale: 1 (Does not apply at all) – 6 (Applies completely) |
| I was admired. | ||
| I was criticized. | ||
| I was ignored. | ||
| I was respected. | ||
| Others tried to steal the show from me. | ||
| I was sidelined. | ||
| I was asked about the coronavirus.† | ||
| I experienced understanding and a feeling of security from others.† | ||
| Emotional states | How did you feel immediately after the interaction? | Rating scale: 1 (Does not apply at all) – 6 (Applies completely) |
| Proud | ||
| Successful | ||
| Superior | ||
| Angry | ||
| Socially excluded† | ||
| Envious | ||
| Resentful | ||
| Ashamed | ||
| Insecure | ||
| Enthusiastic | ||
| Relaxed | ||
| Anxious | ||
| Sad | ||
| Lonely† | ||
| Finally, please use the following sliders to indicate how dissatisfied vs satisfied and calm vs activated you felt overall: | Select one using slider: 0 – 100 | |
| dissatisfied vs satisfied | ||
| calm vs activated | ||
| If no interaction (i.e., if non-social activity) | ||
| Type of activity | What kind of activity was it? | Select one: 1 (job-related task/chore); 2 (private task/chore); 3 (leisure activity) |
| Mode of activity | The activity evaluated here took place as follows: | Select one: 1 (on the computer/laptop/tablet/cell phone); 2 (not on the computer/laptop/tablet/cell phone) |
| COVID-19-specific activities | The activity related to: | Select one: 1 (Yes); 2 (No) |
| Researching the coronavirus† | ||
| Reading news about the coronavirus† | ||
| Perceptual states | During the activity, I perceived the following: | Rating scale: 1 (Does not apply at all) – 6 (Applies completely) |
| I found the activity pleasant. | ||
| I had fun. | ||
| I did tasks that others assigned to me. | ||
| I was intellectually/mentally stimulated. | ||
| I was overwhelmed. | ||
| I was bored. | ||
| I was concentrated. | ||
| I was motivated. | ||
| I thought about the coronavirus.† | ||
| Emotional states | How did you feel immediately after the activity? | Rating scale: 1 (Does not apply at all) – 6 (Applies completely) |
| Proud | ||
| Successful | ||
| Superior | ||
| Angry | ||
| Socially excluded† | ||
| Envious | ||
| Resentful | ||
| Ashamed | ||
| Insecure | ||
| Enthusiastic | ||
| Relaxed | ||
| Anxious | ||
| Sad | ||
| Lonely† | ||
| Finally, please use the following sliders to indicate how dissatisfied vs satisfied and calm vs activated you felt overall: | Select one using slider: 0 – 100 | |
| dissatisfied vs satisfied | ||
| calm vs activated | ||
| Interaction-independent, coronavirus-related momentary worries | Due to the coronavirus outbreak, I am worried about … | Rating scale: 1 (Very little) – 6 (Very much) |
| Self-related worries | … my health.* | |
| … my social life.* | ||
| … my university studies/my work.* | ||
| Society-related worries | … the healthcare system in Germany.* | |
| … social cohesion in Germany.* | ||
| … the economy/working life in Germany.* | ||
| … cultural life in Germany.* | ||
| Other-related worries (voluntary items: if an item did not apply, it could be skipped) | ||
| Parents-related worries | … my parents’ health.* | |
| Grandparents-related worries | … my grandparents’ health.* | |
| Siblings-related worries | … my siblings’ health.* | |
| Children-related worries | … my children’s health.† | |
| Partner-related worries | … my partner’s health.* | |
| Close-friends-related worries | … my close friends’ health.* | |
| Wider-social-environment-related worries | … the health of my wider social environment (fellow university students, other acquaintances).* |
[i] Note: This table presents all state items administered in the EMOTIONS project, organized into self-construed item sets and accompanied by each item’s response format. Some items were adapted from the Interpersonal Adjective Scales (IAL; German version by Jacobs & Scholl, 2005; English version by Wiggins et al., 1988), the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; German versions by Krohne et al., 1996; Röcke & Grühn, 2003; English version by Watson et al., 1988), and the affect grid (Russell et al., 1989). Other items and all response formats were self-generated. Items marked with an asterisk (*) were administered from S1W2 onwards, and items marked with a cross (†) were administered from S2W1 onwards. Number of participants who and state reports that provided data on all state items (except for those items that assessed [a] the relationship to each interaction partner due to their dependency on the number of interaction partners and [b] interaction-independent, coronavirus-related momentary worries due to their mostly voluntary nature) per study wave (either post social interaction or non-social activity): nS1W1 participants = 313 (interaction = 238; activity = 75), nS1W1 ESM reports = 17,464 (interaction = 10,548; activity = 6,916), nS1W2 participants = 193 (interaction = 146; activity = 47), nS1W2 ESM reports = 12,048 (interaction = 7,486; activity = 4,562), nS2W1 participants = 1,645 (interaction = 1,152; activity = 493), nS2W1 ESM reports = 40,994 (interaction = 25,210; activity = 15,784), nS2W2 participants = 914 (interaction = 698; activity = 216), nS2W2 ESM reports = 23,816 (interaction = 14,663; activity = 9,153). For full instructions and the order of assessment, please refer to the study-wave-specific codebooks. Each codebook offers the most detailed and chronological transcript of every EMOTIONS wave (incl. all instructions, item wordings, and response formats) and can be retrieved from: osf.io/6kzx3/.
a Participants were interrogated on their relationships with—for instance—a third interaction partner only if they reported that three or more people were involved in the preceding interaction.
Table 10
Description of all EMOTIONS Data Sets.
| STUDY 1 | STUDY 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WAVE 1 | WAVE 2 | WAVE 1 | WAVE 2 | ||
| File name and data type | Trait data (processed data) | Study1_Wave1_Traitdata.csv | Study1_Wave2_Traitdata.csv | Study2_Wave1_Traitdata.csv | Study2_Wave2_Traitdata.csv |
| Merged trait data (merged from the processed data sets above) | Study1_BothWaves_Traitdata_inclWave1[2]-only.csv | Study2_BothWaves_Traitdata_inclWave1[2]-only.csv | |||
| ESM data (processed data) | Study1_Wave1_ESMdata.csv | Study1_Wave2_ESMdata.csv | Study2_Wave1_ESMdata.csv | Study2_Wave2_ESMdata.csv | |
| Merged ESM data (merged from the processed data sets above) | Study1_BothWaves_ESMdata_inclWave1[2]-only.csv | Study2_BothWaves_ESMdata_inclWave1[2]-only.csv | |||
| Format name and version | CSVAll state (i.e., ESM) data sets are in long format. | ||||
| Language | American English | ||||
| License | CC-By Attribution 4.0 International | ||||
| Limits to sharing | All EMOTIONS data are shared on osf.io/6kzx3/. We encourage researchers wishing to use (subsets of) the EMOTIONS data to link their preregistrations on OSF with the EMOTIONS project OSF page. Preregistrations can be created directly via OSF Registries (osf.io/registries/osf/new). Likewise, any other approach to preregistration is welcome (e.g., a self-generated preregistration file that is uploaded on OSF). In this preregistration, we ask researchers to specify their research objective(s)/question(s), hypotheses, and the EMOTIONS data to be used. This procedure will allow other investigators and us to keep an overview of all planned and ongoing research projects that employ EMOTIONS data, minimizing potential overlap between different research projects. Moreover, we created a Google Survey (https://forms.gle/MDj6WceMcioq5eUt9), where we kindly ask all researchers planning to utilize the EMOTIONS data to provide brief information on themselves, their research question(s), and the EMOTIONS data of interest. By providing such up-to-date, easily-generated information on upcoming research projects, this survey is supposed to supplement the more formal preregistration mentioned above. As noted in Section 2.7, we took several measures to anonymize the data prior to its publication. One measure was the removal of possibly identifiable variables (participant code, gender, gender specification, age, semester of studies, and field of studies). However, all variables (except for participant code) can be personally requested from us. | ||||
| Publication date | 04/11/2022 | ||||
| FAIR data/Codebooks | Codebook_EMOTIONS_Study1_Wave1.pdf, Codebook_EMOTIONS_Study1_Wave2.pdf, Codebook_EMOTIONS_Study2_Wave1.pdf, and Codebook_EMOTIONS_Study2_Wave2.pdf to be retrieved from OSF | ||||
[i] Note: This table provides detailed information on all shared EMOTIONS data sets. S1W1 = Study 1 Wave 1 (all other waves are abbreviated analogously). “_inclWave1[2]-only” indicates that participants who completed either S1W1 or S1W2 (likewise: S2W1 or S2W2) only have been included in addition to participants who completed both waves.