The Use of Life History Calendars with Youth in Research

Background and Purpose: Conducting research with minors, especially on sensitive topics, is challenging given that they are a vulnerable and protected population. Retrospective reports on experiences in childhood gleaned from adults are limited by potential recall bias. Calendar instruments as research methodologies aim to collect retrospective data and attend to recall bias by enhancing respondents’ long-term memory. They use landmark events, experiences that are easier to recall (e.g., school grade, where they lived), to ground respondents to the period in which they are recalling milestone events (study-relevant constructs). Life history calendars (LHCs) are calendar instruments that allow research participants to map out the onset, duration, sequencing, and co-occurrence of life events. Since their initial use, there have been many variations and adaptations of LHCs used in research. This methodological review synthesizes the use of LHCs with youth (ages 15-24), eliciting: What topics are addressed in research with youth using LHCs?; How are LHCs being administered with youth in research?; What are the designs, formats, and data collection periods of LHCs being used in research with youth?; What evidence of validity and reliability does research with youth using LHCs present?

Methods: Two electronic databases (PsycINFO and PubMed) and Google Scholar were searched to identify the extant literature related to the use of LHCs with youth in the United States. The study inclusion criteria are: 1) in the English language; 2) conducted in the United States; 3) empirical article; 4) sample mean age at time of LHC completion falls into the range of 15-24; and 5) an LHC specifically was used and described in detail (to have extractable information on LHC administration, design, or format).

Results: Twenty-seven studies were identified that used an LHC with youth samples. Frequently, LHCs are being used to collect data on sensitive topics (n=23; e.g., sexual experiences, sexual identity development, substance use history) and but also less sensitive topics like experiences related to maturing from adolescence to adulthood or impacts of military-related events on youth. Variations and adaptations of LHCs include the option for it to be interviewer-administered or self-administered and in paper or online formats. The design, formatting, and data collection period of the LHCs varied depending on the study aim. The data collection periods ranged from birth (or as far as participants could remember) to the past year. Through the use of LHCs, 10 studies collected quantitative, 6 collected qualitative, and 11 collected mixed method data. Some studies included components designed to test aspects of reliability and/or validity of their LHC data.

Conclusions and Implications: LHCs are an innovative and person-centered methodological approach that can be used in different ways to collect retrospective data on a variety of topics. This methodological review presents a synthesis of the ways LHCs have been used and can inform researchers on how to design LHCs based on their study aims. It is critical to have methodological approaches that enhance accuracy of retrospective reporting on childhood experiences given the difficulties in studying sensitive topics with minors.