A Review of Scientific Progress in Flow in Sport and Exercise: Normal Science, Crisis, and a Progressive Shift

Abstract

Flow is highly relevant and desirable in sport and exercise. Drawing on ideas from iconic philosophers of science—Thomas Kuhn, Karl Popper, and Imre Lakatos—we argue that research in this field has followed a pattern of “normal science.” With a series of accumulating criticisms and “anomalies,” we propose flow research is approaching a “crisis point.” We highlight problems with research based on the traditional nine-dimensions conceptualization of flow. Then, drawing on the work of Popper and Lakatos, we offer theoretical and methodological suggestions for developing a more progressive and practically useful theory for researchers and practitioners.

Notes

1 Other positive psychological states such as peak performance (e.g., Harmison, 2011) and peak experience (see Jackson & Kimiecik, 2008) have also been studied in sport and exercise; however, flow is the most developed (e.g., with validated questionnaires) and widely studied of these concepts, and therefore the focus of this article.

2 In some instances—usually outside of sport and exercise—autotelic experience is not seen as a separate or additional dimension but rather a description of the flow experience generally (e.g., Engeser & Rheinberg, 2008). In sport and exercise, however, the trend has been to present it as one of the nine dimensions (including in Csikszentmihalyi's work; e.g., Csikszentmihalyi, Latter, & Weinkauff Duranso, 2017).

3 The evidence presented here suggests that two distinct states are conflated within the nine-dimensions framework. It may be the case that other states, such as psychological momentum, are similarly conflated, but without such evidence as yet we refer to two states specifically.