Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35465560›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022

A Scoping Review of Flow Research.

Corinna Peifer, Gina Wolters, László Harmat, Jean Heutte, Jasmine Tan, Teresa Freire, Dionísia Tavares, Carla Fonte, Frans Orsted Andersen, Jef van den Hout and 4 more

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. The effect of music tempo on movement flow.Frontiers in psychology · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Corinna PeiferDepartment of Psychology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Gina WoltersFaculty of Psychology, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
László HarmatDepartment of Psychology, Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden.
Jean HeutteULR 4354 - CIREL - Centre Interuniversitaire de Recherche en Education de Lille, Université de Lille, Lille, France.
Jasmine TanDepartment of Psychology, Goldsmiths University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Teresa FreireSchool of Psychology, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal.
Dionísia TavaresSchool of Psychology, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal.
Carla FonteFaculty of Human and Social Sciences, University Fernando Pessoa, Porto, Portugal.
Frans Orsted AndersenDepartment of Education, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark.
Jef van den HoutIndustrial Engineering and Innovation Sciences, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands.
Milija ŠimlešaInstitute of Psychology Henri Pieron, Université Paris 5 René Descartes, Paris, France.
Linda PolaDepartment of Cultural Heritage and Environment, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Lucia CejaIESE Business School, University of Navarra, Barcelona, Spain.
Stefano TribertiDepartment of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Flow is a gratifying state of deep involvement and absorption that individuals report when facing a challenging activity and they perceive adequate abilities to cope with it (EFRN, 2014). The flow concept was introduced by Csikszentmihalyi in 1975, and interest in flow research is growing. However, to our best knowledge, no scoping review exists that takes a systematic look at studies on flow which were published between the years 2000 and 2016. Overall, 252 studies have been included in this review. Our review (1) provides a framework to cluster flow research, (2) gives a systematic overview about existing studies and their findings, and (3) provides an overview about implications for future research. The provided framework consists of three levels of flow research. In the first "Individual" level are the categories for personality, motivation, physiology, emotion, cognition, and behavior. The second "Contextual" level contains the categories for contextual and interindividual factors and the third "Cultural" level contains cultural factors that relate to flow. Using our framework, we systematically present the findings for each category. While flow research has made progress in understanding flow, in the future, more experimental and longitudinal studies are needed to gain deeper insights into the causal structure of flow and its antecedents and consequences.

Indexed as

contextual levelcultural levelflowindividual levelscoping review

Identifiers

PMID35465560
PMCPMC9022035

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.