Abstract
AbstractIn a real-life study using time-based ambulatory assessment, we investigated how to unobtrusively capture within-subject and between-subject variations in flow in everyday life. We compared two observation approaches, momentary states, and coverage, which differed in the reference of flow reports and sampling frequency. Depending on condition, participants (N = 38) answered either ten or five queries per day that referred to the current state or the last two hours (n = 1442 observations in total). We found no effect of either approach on compliance, flow intensity, or flow reports over time. However, the approaches differed with respect to flow probability reports, within-subject variability in flow reports, and perceived burden. In addition, we introduced a reduced three-item version of the Flow Short Scale. Our results indicate acceptable to good reliability as well as concurrent, convergent and discriminant validity of this scale. Based on our findings, we recommend that the choice of observation approach for capturing everyday flow depends on the outcome of interest, the targeted comparison within- or between-subjects, and the expected task variability of the participants. Limitations regarding our sampling procedure and the retrospective assessment of flow experiences are discussed.
Funder
Karlsruher Institut für Technologie (KIT)
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC