About this Research Topic
The COVID19 pandemic forced an unprecedented shift towards remote data collection, and this increased adoption rate accelerated the pace of methodological development. Through the use of browser and phone app-based data collection methods, home devices for measuring activity and physiology (e.g. heart rate, steps, sleep), and wider adoption of telehealth (e.g. videoconference therapy), there are more opportunities than ever to make participating in research more accessible through technology. This accessibility has important implications for improving the generalizability of research, by increasing the feasibility of collecting larger samples; inclusion of groups underrepresented in research, whether due to gender, health status, race, socioeconomic background, living in a rural area, etc.; and enabling better powered studies, replications, as well as automated protocols not influenced by experimenter effects (e.g. social desirability bias).
However, along with the advantages of increased accessibility, scalability, and reduced costs, come challenges involving the loss of a controlled lab environment, experimenter-participant rapport, and challenges regarding privacy requirements. In this Research Topic we hope to highlight the progress that has been made toward improving the user friendliness, data quality, and tool capabilities for remotely conducting research, and the knowledge gained by doing so. We particularly aim to highlight research involving clinical populations or questions, and methodological advances gained by collecting data at greater scale (e.g. computational modeling).
We invite submissions focused on any of the following:
• Papers addressing the methodological limits and/or strengths of remote data collection
• Empirical papers containing basic science experimental results (particularly in groups with limited access to research such as people in rural areas, those with rare health conditions, diverse sexualities, gender identities, racial or economic backgrounds, people in prison or jail, military service members and Veterans)
• Interventional studies or clinical trials that deliver interactive interventions or treatments (e.g. virtual therapy, virtual reality).
• Studies that incorporate multi-modal data collection (e.g. using devices, remote eye tracking, ecological momentary assessment, etc.) are also welcomed.
However, along with the advantages of increased accessibility, scalability, and reduced costs, come challenges involving the loss of a controlled lab environment, experimenter-participant rapport, and challenges regarding privacy requirements. In this Research Topic we hope to highlight the progress that has been made toward improving the user friendliness, data quality, and tool capabilities for remotely conducting research, and the knowledge gained by doing so. We particularly aim to highlight research involving clinical populations or questions, and methodological advances gained by collecting data at greater scale (e.g. computational modeling).
We invite submissions focused on any of the following:
• Papers addressing the methodological limits and/or strengths of remote data collection
• Empirical papers containing basic science experimental results (particularly in groups with limited access to research such as people in rural areas, those with rare health conditions, diverse sexualities, gender identities, racial or economic backgrounds, people in prison or jail, military service members and Veterans)
• Interventional studies or clinical trials that deliver interactive interventions or treatments (e.g. virtual therapy, virtual reality).
• Studies that incorporate multi-modal data collection (e.g. using devices, remote eye tracking, ecological momentary assessment, etc.) are also welcomed.
Keywords: Remote Data Collection, Accessibility, Clinical Research, Methodologies
Important Note: All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.
