Who are we missing? Self-selection bias in nonsuicidal self-injury research

BACKGROUND

Despite the threat of self-selection bias to the generalizability of research findings, remarkably little is known about who chooses to take part in non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) research specifically. We aimed to establish the extent of willingness to take part in NSSI research within a commonly sampled population before assessing whether individual differences in demographic characteristics, NSSI lived experience, and participation experiences were associated with willingness to take part in future NSSI research.

METHODS

New Zealand university students (n = 3098) completed self-report measures of their NSSI, psychological distress, emotional dysregulation, experience of their participation in the current study, and willingness to participate in future NSSI research.

RESULTS

Most participants (78.2%) indicated that they were willing to take part in future NSSI research. Men, older participants, people with NSSI lived experience, and those with more frequent past-year NSSI were more likely to be willing to take part in future NSSI research. Participants who reported a more positive subjective experience of the current study also indicated greater willingness.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings demonstrate systematic differences in who is willing to take part in NSSI research. Future research should implement methodological and statistical approaches to mitigate the impact of self-selection bias on NSSI research.

Further Silencing the Voiceless: The Role of Gatekeepers in Accessing Information About Self-Injury

ABSTRACT

Gatekeepers play a pivotal role in protecting individuals under their care and are central to keeping people safe and away from harm. In the field of nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI), a range of gatekeepers exist, including those who protect access to vulnerable research participants, those who protect school children, those charged with making decisions about funding priorities, and those in charge of clinical care for people who self-injure. The aim of this commentary is to outline the roles these different gatekeepers have in protecting access to research participants, access to NSSI knowledge, and access to clinical care for individuals who self-injure. We provide examples in which gatekeepers may present barriers and offer solutions for how to work with gatekeepers for mutual benefit.

Opening the Black Box of Daily Life in Nonsuicidal Self-injury Research: With Great Opportunity Comes Great Responsibility

Although nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI)-deliberate damaging of body tissue without suicidal intent-is a behavior that occurs in interaction with real-world contexts, studying NSSI in the natural environment has historically been impossible. Recent advances in real-time monitoring technologies have revolutionized our ability to do exactly that, providing myriad research and clinical practice opportunities. In this viewpoint paper, we review new research pathways to improve our ability to understand, predict, and prevent NSSI, and provide critical perspectives on the responsibilities inherent to conducting real-time monitoring studies on NSSI. Real-time monitoring brings unique opportunities to advance scientific understanding about (1) the dynamic course of NSSI, (2) the real-time predictors thereof and ability to detect acute risk, (3) the ecological validity of theoretical models, (4) the functional mechanisms and outcomes of NSSI, and (5) the promotion of person-centered care and novel technology-based interventions. By considering the opportunities of real-time monitoring research in the context of the accompanying responsibilities (eg, inclusive recruitment, sound and transparent research practices, participant safety and engagement, measurement reactivity, researcher well-being and training), we provide novel insights and resources to open the black box of daily life in the next decade(s) of NSSI research.