Flow experience and the mobilization of attentional resources

Abstract

The present study attempts to better identify the neurophysiological changes occurring during flow experience and how this can be related to the mobilization of attentional resources. Self-reports of flow (using a flow feelings scale) and attention (using thought probes), autonomic activity (heart rate, heart rate variability, and breathing rate), and cerebral oxygenation (using near-infrared spectroscopy) in two regions of the frontoparietal attention network (right lateral frontal cortex and right inferior parietal lobe) were measured during the practice of two simple video games (Tetris and Pong) played at different difficulty conditions (easy, optimal, hard, or self-selected). Our results indicated that an optimal level of difficulty, compared with an easy or hard level of difficulty led to greater flow feelings and a higher concentration of oxygenated hemoglobin in the regions of the frontoparietal network. The self-selected, named autonomy condition did not lead to more flow feelings than the optimal condition; however, the autonomy condition led to greater sympathetic activity (reduced heart rate variability and greater breathing rate) and higher activation of the frontoparietal regions. Our study suggests that flow feelings are highly connected to the mobilization of attentional resources, and all the more in a condition that promotes individuals' choice and autonomy.

Game-based learning environments affect frontal brain activity

“…Moreover, previous neurofunctional studies found increased frontal brain activation during game-based task versions with higher flow experience [28,32,86]. Using NIRS, de Sampaio Barros et al (2018) investigated neuronal correlates of flow experience during gaming. They found that oxy-Hb was highest in an optimal state of task demands experienced to balance player resources.…”

“…Some studies reported a global decrease of oxy-Hb over frontal brain areas during gaming [23][24][25][26][27]. However, differences in task complexity, cognitive load, expertise, or subjective user experience during playing may have added to these different brain activation patterns [28][29][30][31][32].…”

Peer Review #1 of "Peripheral-physiological and neural correlates of the flow experience while playing video games: a comprehensive review (v0.1)"

“…Considering the involvement of VLPFC in top-down attention (Raz & Buhle, 2006), one can interpret this as a co-activation of the attentional and reward networks during the flow experience (Weber, Huskey, & Craighead, 2016). The results of the study by De Sampaio Barros et al (2018) showed a significant positive correlation between the self-reported measure of attention and the average neural activation in the frontoparietal regions. Higher activation in the lateral PFC was reported in the flow and autonomy conditions while playing Tetris and Pong compared to the other conditions.…”

“…The observed higher mental effort (lower HRV) and more focused attention (more focused eye gaze) along with less self-reported subjective effort in the flow condition than in the over-challenged condition suggested that the experience of flow is based on an efficient, but effortful, engagement of attention. The link between attention and flow was also examined by De Sampaio Barros et al (2018) to see whether flow mobilizes attentional resources while playing two video games, Tetris and Pong. The authors added an "autonomy" condition to the traditional under-challenged, flow, and over-challenged conditions.…”

Investigating the “Flow” Experience: Key Conceptual and Operational Issues

“…When this happens in the realm of science, fierce debate usually ensues in an attempt to resolve the conflict. An example of this can be found in the field of abnormal Flow Short Scale (Rheinberg et al, 2003) and related scales 2 Baumann et al, 2016Barros et al, 2018Brom et al, 2017Harris et al, 2017a,b Hermann and Vollmeyer, 2016Schattke et al, 2014 Four items from the absorption subscale of the Flow Short Scale Rivkin et al, 2018 Continuous No No Flow Short Scale with three additional items measuring "autotelic experience" Rankin et al, 2019 Continuous Yes Yes (partly) Flow State Scale (Jackson and Marsh, 1996) and related scales Borovay et al, 2019Beltrán et al, 2018Forkosh and Drake, 2017Harmat et al, 2015Joo et al, 2015Kaye et al, 2018Marston et al, 2016 Continuous Yes Yes (partly)…”