ArticlePloS one2025
The flow experience: Polish adaptation and validation of the psychological flow scale (PFS).
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Flow is an absorbing, effortless, and intrinsically rewarding state that unfolds over time. We adapted the nine-item Psychological Flow Scale (PFS) to Polish and evaluated it in a preregistered laboratory study designed to capture fine-grained changes in flow. After individual skill calibration, participants completed a 20-trial pursuit-tracking task following a chaotic Lorenz trajectory; data from 140 participants met inclusion criteria. Multilevel confirmatory factor analysis supported the theorized structure: Absorption, Effortless Control, and Intrinsic Reward formed correlated first-order factors nested under a second-order Flow factor at both the within-person and between-person levels (χ²(46) = 345.35, CFI = 0.98, RMSEA = 0.05). Reliability was excellent for aggregated scores (generalizability RkF = 1.00) and remained high for detecting trial-to-trial change (Rc = 0.88), indicating sensitivity to momentary fluctuations. Convergent validity was evidenced by moderate correlations with the Flow Short Scale administered concurrently (r = .28-.39), low-to-modest correlations with task performance score (r = .13-.32), and low-to-modest associations with the General Flow Proneness Scale (r = .13-.26). Complementary hierarchical exploratory graph analysis corroborated this three-facet-plus-general structure. Collectively, these findings establish the Polish PFS as a reliable, culturally appropriate instrument for tracking the temporal dynamics of optimal experience and illustrate how repeated measurement coupled with multilevel modelling can advance research on flow.
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.