ArticleBehavior research methods2024
A video-game-based method to induce states of high and low flow.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond entertainment: cultural-psychological mechanisms underlying the reduction of state anxiety in heritage-based serious games.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Physiological assessment of the psychological flow state using wearable devices.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A framework for neurophysiological experiments on flow states.Communications psychology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Flow has been defined as a state of full immersion that may emerge when the skills of a person match the challenge of an activity. It is a special case of being on task, as during flow, keeping focused on the task feels effortless. Most experimental investigations of the neural or physiological correlates of flow contrast conditions with different levels of challenge. Yet comparing different levels of challenge that are too distant may trigger states where the participant is off task, such as boredom or frustration. Thus, it remains unclear whether previously observed differences ascribed to flow may rather reflect differences in how much participants were on task-trying their best-across the contrasted conditions. To remedy this, we introduce a method to manipulate flow by contrasting two video game play conditions at personalized levels of difficulty calibrated such that participants similarly tried their best in both conditions. Across three experiments (> 90 participants), higher flow was robustly reported in our high-flow than in our low-flow condition (mean effect size d = 1.31). Cardiac, respiratory, and skin conductance measures confirmed the known difference between a period of rest and the two on-task conditions of high and low flow, but failed to distinguish between these latter two. In light of the conflicting findings regarding the physiological correlates of flow, we discuss the importance of ensuring a low-flow baseline condition that maintains participants on task, and propose that the present method provides a methodological advance toward that goal.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.