‘Living in the moment’: mountain bikers’ search for flow

ABSTRACT

As a popular adventure sport worldwide, mountain biking provides a range of challenges and opportunities for participants. This paper aims to understand whether experienced riders actively search for ‘flow experiences’ that can manifest themselves in a range of euphoric feelings, varying from the loss of awareness of time to sub-conscious control over actions. Exploring findings from research undertaken in New Zealand and England, the paper suggests that committed riders do encounter and can describe a range of flow characteristics when riding, although the findings conclude that such experiences are considered to be by-products of participation, rather than motivational factors in their own right.

KEYWORDS:

• Flow
• mountain biking
• mastery
• adventure

It has long been accepted that ‘the primary motive for participation in adventure activities is the intrinsic psychological benefits to be gained by individuals from recreational challenges’ (Hall 1992, 145). These ‘optimal experiences’, described in terms of their meaningful, special or out-of-the-ordinary nature (Mannell 1996), arguably increase in importance as people become more engaged in adventure recreation activities and satisfy intrinsic motivations (Ewert and Hollenhorst 1989: Boudreau, Houge Mackenzie, and Hodge 2020).

Adventure sports are commonly associated with natural human desires for risk taking and the quest for excitement (Ewert and Hollenhorst 1989; Breivik 2010). The notion that adventurous activities can result in participants having what is termed as an ‘optimal experience’ is now commonly accepted amongst the research community, and the benefits of such experiences fuel demand for further recreation (Mackenzie, Hodge, and Boyes 2011). It is plausible that without the possibility of such intrinsic rewards there would not be the motivation required for many people to participate in an adventurous pursuit such as mountain biking.

While few studies have been undertaken to determine key motivations for mountain biking, Skår, Odden, and Vistad (2008), for example, concluded that physical exercise, contemplation and nature experience are the most important motivations for bikers. In trying to understand these seemingly antagonistic motivations, it was proposed that a mountain bike ride ‘may be just what is required to change focus … and release the frustrations of daily life’ (Skår, Odden, and Vistad 2008, 42). Long argued to be a fun activity appreciated for its intrinsic worth, not for any utilitarian value it may have (Holbrook and Hirschman 1982), for many adults mountain biking has been viewed as akin to play, ‘an activity undertaken solely for enjoyment … [and] an antidote to all the mundane duties of adulthood’ (Roberts 1995, 36). Recently, researchers have noted the psychological well-being and therapeutic benefits that motivate mountain bikers (Roberts, Jones, and Brooks 2018). As mountain bikers become more experienced it is argued that these intrinsic motivations for participation move beyond fun and are imbued with a harder edge.

Mountain biking and flow has received little academic attention, the only previous work undertaken by Folmer et al. (2019), Santos, Oliveira, and Pires (2017) and Dodson (1996). Folmer et al.’s (2019) study is not wholly pertinent as the authors chose a paved riding route as the research setting and discussions around flow were rather incidental. Dodson (1996) examined ‘peak experiences’ in the incorporation of the mountain bike into the self; these peak experiences were defined in this context as ‘highly intense, significant, and fulfilling experiences for people’ (Dodson 1996, 317). Ultimately, however, the focus of Dodson’s research on the role of the bike itself in the attainment of such experiences precluded further explanation of this finding, most significantly regarding the manifest elements of those peak experiences. Similarly Horn, Devlin, and Simmons (1994) suggested that many of the characteristics of flow can be experienced when mountain biking, but the construct was not empirically tested within the activity’s context. Brown (2012) acknowledged the importance to mountain bikers of maintaining a certain rhythm and speed, conditions which can give rise to moments of flow, with commensurate implications for riders’ behaviour on shared, ‘contested’ trails.

Elsewhere ‘flow’ has arisen as a minor motivation in research findings about mountain biking as a form of serious leisure when Bordelon and Ferreira (2019) interviewed mountain bikers on the eight-day ‘Cape Epic’ in South Africa. Despite the potential for mountain bikers to have optimal experiences there is scant material examining this phenomenon in detail within the mountain biking context; this paper, in part, aims to redress this, by examining whether experienced riders actively search for flow experiences on the trail or if they are just a by-product of the adventure experience (Varley 2006).

The search for optimal experiences

Csikszentmihalyi was one of the first researchers to explore the human drive for experiences beyond the everyday. His 1975 book Beyond Boredom and Anxiety alluded to some of the key push factors that are considered part of the appeal of adventure recreation participation, as a participant’s competence or mastery of a situation would increase the likelihood of the optimal ‘flow’ experience (Csikszentmihalyi 1975). Rooted in the work of Maslow (1943), the theory of flow that was developed by Csikszentmihalyi is perhaps the most influential and oft-quoted construct in defining the adventure experience (Cater 2006; Varley 2006; Lipscombe 2007; McGillivray and Frew 2007, for example).

Flow describes ‘the holistic sensation that people feel when they act with total involvement’ (Csikszentmihalyi 1975, 36), and has been applied to activities as diverse as dancing, chess and climbing, activities which may have few extrinsic rewards (Csikszentmihalyi and Csikszentmihalyi 1990). People’s requirements extend beyond the satisfaction of basic needs, and intrinsically rewarding flow experiences are not just a means to an end, but an end in themselves (Voelkl, Ellis, and Walker 2003). The model has been applied to adventure recreation, reasoning that ‘adventure participants are searching for a peculiar state of experience, an experience that is rarely accessible in everyday life’ (Csikszentmihalyi and Csikszentmihalyi 1990, 154).

There are a number of prerequisite conditions that must be present for flow to be experienced: participation in the activity must be voluntary, facilitating the necessary level of arousal and entail psychological commitment from the participant (Ryan 2002). These elements only rarely converge and flow for most people is therefore a mysterious and evasive phenomenon (Voelkl, Ellis, and Walker 2003). Since the development of flow theory, a number of elements associated with flow experiences have been identified, although seven indicators, ranging from perceptions of the balance between challenge and skill, to a loss of self-consciousness, when the person is at one with the activity, are generally considered to be key (Csikszentmihalyi and Csikszentmihalyi 1990).

A specific advantage of the flow model over Maslow’s work is the deliberate development of methods for the measurement of flow (Ryan 2002), and the concept has been empirically tested in a number of different adventure recreation activities, for example, whitewater kayaking (Jones, Hollenhorst, and Perna 2003). Whitewater kayaking experiences have also been empirically tested using a modified version of the model, termed the four-channel model (Jones et al. 2000).

Potentially rewarded by feelings of flow, mastering a challenge presented by an activity, whether physical or psychological in nature, is an important motivation in adventure recreation (Csikszentmihalyi and Csikszentmihalyi 1990; Jones, Hollenhorst, and Perna 2003; Boudreau, Houge Mackenzie, and Hodge 2020). As a motivation for participation, mastery is considered to become more important as people become more engaged in adventure recreation activities and favour such intrinsic motivations (Ewert and Hollenhorst 1989). Mastery suggests that people’s ability to conquer the challenges of situational risk create the opportunities for optimal experiences (Iso-Ahola 1980). Many adventure recreation activities are intrinsically rewarding, as they can represent a new kind of challenge, one that calls upon a skill set not apparent in everyday life (Csikszentmihalyi and Csikszentmihalyi 1990). As people become more skilled and experienced, and consequently better able to assess and overcome challenges (Martin and Priest 1986), they are more inclined to seek ways of challenging themselves (Ewert and Hollenhorst 1989). Amongst experienced mountain bikers mastery of a challenge can help create the necessary conditions for having ‘optimal experiences’ during participation, as people become totally absorbed in their activity.

The balance of individual competence and perceived situational risk, correlating closely to skill and challenge, forms the core of the Adventure Experience Paradigm (Martin and Priest 1986), devised as a model that could depict the range of positive (flow) and negative outcomes arising from adventure which Priest later explained was ‘dependent on the interaction of situational risk and personal competence’ (Priest 1992, 127).

More recent research has focussed on specific activities such as surfing (Cheng and Lu 2015; Wheaton, Roy, and Olive 2017), mountain hiking (Wöran and Arnberger 2012) and climbing (Rickly-Boyd 2012; Tsaur, Yen, and Hsiao 2013), a number of which could be classed as ‘lifestyle sports’. Encompassing a range of sports that can encompass adventure activities, but which are more pertinently defined as being ‘alternative’ from mainstream sports (Wheaton 2004), lifestyle sports ‘embody a more playful approach to the participation experience’ and are characterised by individuality and, importantly in the context of flow, ‘participant control’(King and Church 2015, 284). Flow is suggested to be a primary motivation for those who pursue a climbing lifestyle (Rickly-Boyd 2012), even if only a minor proportion of the climbing day offers opportunities for getting into ‘the zone’ (Wheaton, Roy, and Olive 2017).

Most researchers have observed that sensation seeking behaviours result in, or fulfil, motivations of participants wanting ‘optimal experiences’, ‘flow’ or ‘peak experiences’ (Diehm and Armatas 2004; Carnicelli-Filho 2010; Cheng and Tsaur 2012; Houge Mackenzie, Hodge, and Boyes 2011). Such optimal experiences may be experienced by participants with a range of skill levels, be they beginners on commercial guided experiences or experts in independent recreational pursuits (Ewert 1987; Arnould and Price 1993; Carr 1997a, 1997b, 2001; Holyfield 1999; Kane and Zink 2004; Buckley 2012; Houge Mackenzie and Kerr 2014). Hagen and Boyes (2016) explored ride experiences from a different angle, that of ‘affect’: non-conscious experiences felt in the body, rather than psychologically, concluding that mountain bikers’ ‘experience became instinctive knowledge in the body’ (Hagen and Boyes 2016, 97). Although not tested, this ‘instinct’ will have positive implications in terms of facilitating the subconscious control over actions so imbued in the flow experience.

No matter what the positive sensations or optimal experiences are called within the adventure context, it is tempting to assume that participants who engage in independent recreational pursuits and who have higher skill levels are likely to experience such optimal experiences, providing the settings meet their needs, their physical prowess no doubt assisting the achievement of the performance levels necessary (Cater and Cloke 2007).

While mountain bikers may regard flow as ‘the epitome of the off-road experience’ (Brown, Marshall, and Dilley 2008, 15), it is recognised that flow is an elusive state (Jones, Hollenhorst, and Perna 2003), and such feelings can be both very individual and so embodied that it is difficult for adventure participants to adequately narrate the intimacy of the experience (Brown, Marshall, and Dilley 2008; Houge Mackenzie, Hodge, and Boyes 2011). Such peak experiences can therefore be ‘characterized by individuals saying, “you have to do it to understand”’ (Dodson 1996, 317), although the use of headcams as a methodological tool may help capture and make sense of the ‘quick fire’ actions and reactions embodied in bikers’ experiences that are difficult to articulate (Brown, Dilley, and Marshall 2008). When riders in Dodson’s (1996, 320) study were asked whether they felt any of the constructs associated with peak experiences, 65% ‘reported their most memorable bike memory as one which contained many of the characteristics of a peak experience’. It is therefore difficult to confirm that mountain bikers are motivated by the desire and search for flow experiences without giving them the opportunity to articulately express their thoughts and feelings that arise as a result of the activity.

A wealth of literature across a range of adventurous disciplines does find significance in flow experiences as a motivational force (Cater et al. 2020; Tsaur, Lin, and Cheng 2015; Wöran and Arnberger 2012; Houge Mackenzie, Hodge, and Boyes 2013; Folmer et al. 2019). It is therefore argued that it remains a cogent and relevant concept, regardless of its validity as a motivation for participation. The focus of this paper is to examine whether experienced mountain bikers do actively seek the out-of-the-ordinary or optimal experiences associated with Csikszentmihalyi’s (1975) flow construct, or are such experiences simply synchronous alongside other outcomes (Varley 2006; Houge Mackenzie and Kerr 2014; Hagen and Boyes 2016; Boudreau, Houge Mackenzie, and Hodge 2020).

Research method

To understand the importance of optimal experiences, mountain bikers in Nelson, New Zealand, and Shrewsbury, England were interviewed. While others (Priest 1992; Diehm and Armatas 2004; Galloway 2010 for example) have used quantitative surveys to analyse dimensions of adventure experiences, this study adopted qualitative research to explore bikers’ deeper feelings and thoughts regarding their participation. A systematic literature review by Boudreau, Houge Mackenzie, and Hodge (2020) examined a range of adventure recreation studies and found that both qualitative and quantitative methods have been utilised successfully in pursuit of the understanding of ‘flow’ experiences.

This study extends the first author’s doctoral study (where the research aimed to examine, in part, participants’ motivations for mountain biking) by exploring whether experienced mountain bikers actively search for flow experiences. This later study delves further into findings from the earlier research, examining the findings that related to the intrinsic rewards that directly or indirectly pertain to flow. The study locations were chosen for their qualities as active mountain biking scenes and a range of trails within easy reach. Semi-structured and open-ended interviews were undertaken until it was considered the findings were saturated, resulting in 30 transcripts. Criterion and snowball sampling were employed to select representative interviewees, recruited through local mountain bike clubs to access members, local bike shops to interview staff members and informal contacts made during the fieldwork.

Of particular relevance to this research were the criteria used to define participants. Regular bikers were chosen who rode at least once a week on average and all year round. The majority of participants had been biking for almost 20 years, displaying a high level of involvement and commitment by riding all year round. This degree of involvement indicates a heightened level of interest and commitment in their chosen leisure pursuit (Scanlan et al. 1993; Havitz and Dimanche 1997). It was considered that experienced bikers would yield more comprehensive findings regarding issues such as optimal experiences, as it is argued that they would better be able to satisfy the key components of flow. They might also be able to better articulate the balance of skill and challenge, drawing upon greater levels of involvement. Nineteen male and 11 female riders was interviewed, ranging in age from early 30s to late 60s. The research concentrated on cross-country riding, as one of the most popular forms of mountain biking (Green 2003; Davies and Newsome 2009).

A pragmatic general inductive method was employed for analysis of the findings, as a systematic yet practical procedure for analysing qualitative data (Thomas 2006). A number of qualitative adventure recreation studies have used a similar method, utilising elements of induction albeit without labelling it as such (e.g. Celsi, Rose, and Leigh 1993; Kane and Tucker 2004; Cater 2006; Houge Mackenzie, Hodge, and Boyes 2011; Swann et al. 2017). Using an inductive method permits reliable and robust findings to be derived directly from the interview responses, not from the interviewer’s preconceived expectations. While it is acknowledged that the development of semi-structured questions invariably directs attention to certain aspects of the findings, as no model was being examined the method remained inductive in nature (Thomas 2006).

Key themes and sub-themes were created through multiple readings of the findings, condensing them into summaries; critical reflection ensured that these themes continued to correctly represent respondents’ experiences. Justifiable links were made between these themes and the research objectives, and appropriate quotations, with respondents identified using pseudonyms, illustrate participants’ meanings in the following discussion.

Findings

The mountain biker’s search for flow

Flow is such a complex, and individual, feeling that it is often difficult to describe (Voelkl, Ellis, and Walker 2003), with an unspoken acknowledgement that participants in sports such as mountain biking ‘understand’ flow but never really reflect on or have to explain it (Säfvenbom, Wheaton, and Agans 2018). By their very nature, such personalised experiences are difficult to define or classify as an onlooker. While flow experiences are logically discussed here as a corollary of mastering challenges on the trail, this would appear to reinforce Varley’s (2006) assertion they are argued to be a by-product of motivational factors such as mastery.

It is apparent, however, that many of the components of flow did have significance for a number of the interviewees. Earlier it was stated that there are seven core elements of flow experiences (Csikszentmihalyi and Csikszentmihalyi 1990). During the interviews no participants suggested that the attainment of peak experiences formed a motivation for mountain biking and none of the interviewee responses alluded to actively seeking them. The responses below suggest that bikers can articulate their experiences and feelings as being akin to flow, without actively seeking it.

The first component is an ‘unconscious sense of control over actions’, when a mountain biker is at one with the activity. Craig believes that sometimes he appears to have no conscious control of his movements: ‘downhills, I’m totally focussed on what I am doing, or not’, going on to add, more pertinently, that: ‘sometimes I ride without consciously processing, that’s just a state of mind’. While adventure recreationists need to totally concentrate on the activity, however, as soon as they devote their attention to maintaining their control the flow experience is reported to be lost (Voelkl, Ellis, and Walker 2003). Concentrating on the flow experiences of more accomplished riders is argued to aid examination of this first component as the bike-handling proficiency that comes with experience facilitates greater unconscious bike control. The risk and uncertainty that are characteristics of tackling a mountain biking trail represent the ‘razor’s edge’ (Martin and Priest 1986): the fine line between a peak experience and potential disaster. It is equally true, however, that if concentration on the action is too great, and the rider is consciously trying to avoid misadventure, the potential for a peak experience can also be lost.

This sense of an unconscious control over an individual’s actions suggests that the actions merge with the person’s awareness, so much so that the person ‘becomes one with the activity’ (Voelkl, Ellis, and Walker 2003, 3). Concentration on the activity rather than on the distractions of the world around riders means that people can often lose track of time when experiencing flow. Tackling a downhill section of a trail, for example, it is considered possible to ‘totally los[e] yourself in the riding’ (Simon); this ‘loss of self-consciousness’ is the second characteristic of flow.

‘Intense concentration’ is the third component. Ian felt that: ‘[on the] downhill you are so focussed on the task in hand that you are just concentrating’. Sandy concurred: ‘downhill the focus is on trying to pick the right line, trying to stop myself looking at the front wheel, forcing myself to look ahead’. The goals for mountain bikers at such times are clearly defined, and immediate responses provide the necessary feedback for instantaneous adjustments and actions that keep the rider in ‘the zone’ (Brown 2012) and enable the flow experience to be maintained. This ‘merging of action and awareness’, the fifth element, can characterise Sean’s mental state: ‘when you are out on the trail, particularly if you are working hard, whether something technical or physically challenging, that is all that is in your mind – that and the world around you’. Flow is therefore characterised by ‘clearly defined goals and immediate feedback’, Beatrice opining that ‘on the downhill I’m very focussed, there’s nothing else to think about except what’s in front of you that millisecond’.

This can lead to a ‘transformation of time’ – the sixth element – when time for her is dictated by the activity at hand, not by the clock. Pauline, for example, explained that she can ‘be very much in the moment’. In such a state it is considered that time for her is dictated by ‘the rhythm of the activity rather than the reference of the time of day’ (Jones, Hollenhorst, and Perna 2003, 18). In this state, Sean feels like ‘the other world over there doesn’t exist’. Interviewee feelings while riding attested to the ability to lose oneself in the moment, which can render one’s actions almost to the level of unconsciousness. Kaplin (1985; cited in Patrick 1988, 20) encapsulates the essence of these experiences, in doing so reinforcing some of the interviewees’ responses: ‘you are able to fuse the moment and your intention together … There’s none of this thinking about what you’re doing and then doing it. It’s an existential dream because you’re right there in the moment’.

The final component of flow is a ‘balance of challenge and skill’. One of the participants, Dorothy, explained how she judges the skill required to meet the risk posed by a tricky trail: ‘it’s a balance, with that element of risk … However, I address that risk quite sensibly. I don’t take my brain out and go down stupid things’. Pauline stated, likewise, that risk on the trail: ‘adds an element of excitement but I prefer managed risk, risk that I’m in control of’, indicating the importance of mastery (Varley 2006).

Balancing challenge and skill

The importance of challenge as a motivation in adventure recreation activities is widely recognised (Beard and Ragheb 1983; Carpenter and Priest 1989; Csikszentmihalyi and Csikszentmihalyi 1990; Jones, Hollenhorst, and Perna 2003); whether tackling fast, flowing downhills or slower, more technical descents, overcoming both the psychological and physiological challenges posed by mountain biking is an important motivating factor. Finding the correct balance between these challenges and the technical skill or competence that one possesses is one of the fundamental tenets of the flow experience; only by mastering this challenge can the necessary psychological state be found where intrinsic feelings of euphoria and freedom are the reward. To either side of this balance lie psychological states that preclude the achievement of optimal experiences: boredom and disaster (Martin and Priest 1986).

To avoid boredom a certain level of challenge is required. One of the interviewees, Robert, encapsulated this: ‘if you just ride down a big, wide, perfectly surfaced track you may as well be on a road’. Jones et al. (2000, 258) reported similar findings when testing for flow experiences among whitewater kayakers, where ‘apathy and boredom were more frequently experienced when engaging the least difficult challenges’. Conversely, when the challenge or risk is greater than one’s competence, ‘misadventure’ or even disaster can result (Jones, Hollenhorst, and Perna 2003), as another participant, Simon, recognises: ‘it’s all about pushing the boundaries, and occasionally you overstep that boundary and crash … [but] then you build up to that boundary again’. In such circumstances, when situational risk can exceed personal competence, cuts and scrapes or a blow to one’s self-esteem can often result (Carpenter and Priest 1989). This exploration of one’s boundaries was a common discussion thread among participants.

‘Exploring your own limits’ was considered by some mountain bikers to be an integral part of tackling descents. People can become totally absorbed in the activity (Tellegen and Atkinson 1974), so much so that they can sometimes put themselves in great danger (Pomfret 2006). While one’s own physical abilities are tested, it is argued that the real battle is psychological, trying to overcome one’s fear. Creyer, Ross, and Evers (2003, 251) confirm that with an increase in mountain biking competence “many participants ‘push the envelope’”; in the desire to experience greater ‘thrills’, bigger risks often need to be taken.

Aside from enabling the feelings associated with flow, achieving one’s goals has worthwhile intrinsic dividends, such as satisfaction and building self-esteem (Loewenstein 1999), or developing expertise (Beard and Ragheb 1983). Mastery can also reward extrinsically, in terms of increasing one’s status in the eyes of others, signalling to other mountain bikers your desire or right to belong to that community (Taylor 2010). Signalling their competence to self and others is evident in a rider’s goal to ‘clean’ a section of trail, avoiding ‘dabbing’ (Brown 2012), or putting a foot down for stability, a move that consequently disrupts their rhythm and their subconscious control over their actions.

This challenge can be a key attraction of mountain biking over and above other activities, hiking or tramping for example. On descents the challenge is seen as both mental and physical: mentally having to overcome a natural fear of obstacles and steep terrain before you can physically conquer the challenge. Participant responses concerning the intrinsic rewards for mastering the challenge suggest that mountain bikers can have peak experiences, giving rise to these feelings of mastery and accomplishment.

Managing the challenge

Participants explained how they try to judge the skill required to meet the challenge posed by a tricky trail. It is suggested that as riders become more accomplished people are better able to perceive the level of risk involved (Celsi, Rose, and Leigh 1993), and that experienced riders are therefore better able to balance skill and challenge and actively manage the situations in which they find themselves (Hagen and Boyes 2016). It is the experienced recreationalist’s competence and experience, and a correct assessment of the balance between situational risk and competence, which enables them to manage this risk (Martin and Priest 1986). Marty explained: ‘I don’t mind risks but will minimise them by analysing what I have to do’, tempering this by admitting: ‘I have the scars, so don’t analyse correctly every time’. This ‘astuteness’ (Carpenter and Priest 1989) reflects the increase in technical competence and experience.

Bob’s feelings suggest that even in an autonomously controlled activity such as mountain biking there still exists a tension between perceived and real risk: ‘I like the idea that it’s risky but then on the downhills in particular I’m trying to minimise it … It’s weird that, isn’t it? I like the idea of risk but I also like to minimise it’. It is proposed that a perception of risk represents a person’s expectations for that particular activity. Although unable to accurately predict the level of challenge, Bob perceived that his ride will be risky, but as a rider of considerable experience he is able to calculate that his perceived skills will be sufficient. His desire to manage the risk represents his attempt to both determine the actual outcome (Carpenter and Priest 1989) and to ensure that his experience rides that line between apathy and anxiety.

Participants in this research routinely extolled the buzz or thrill from riding; very few however would describe how these moments would be accompanied by the unconscious control over actions so essential to the flow experience. In some cases the converse was true. One participant, Ian, considered that: ‘the thrill in downhill biking comes from fast flowing, being in control’. While thrill and rush are commonplace while riding, flow remains an elusive phenomenon befitting of its ‘peak experience’ status.

Singletrack: the ideal setting to experience flow?

Amongst the study participants it was the potential thrills offered by flowing singletrack trails that seemed most influential in motivating people to seek out these environments, where, it is argued, the conditions that are conducive to attaining flow are perhaps most likely to exist. Singletrack was described by one of the interviewees, Dick, as ‘just the best invention in the world’. Often used anecdotally in combination with a term such as flowing, singletrack is defined as:

A trail or pathway that is only wide enough to accommodate users travelling in single file … [and that] provides users with a closer connection to nature, segregation from motorized vehicles, and a more challenging or varied experience than double track or roads can provide (Koepke 2005, 3).

This suggested relationship between ‘flow’ and ‘flowing singletrack’ can be explained in terms of flowing trails being characterised by relatively smooth surfaces that allow, and indeed encourage, the rider to achieve a certain level of speed and momentum and, crucially, enable the trails to be ridden without this momentum being interrupted These factors combine to create the desirable rhythm that symbolises a flowing trail. The narrowness of these trails also often demands immediate and reactionary handling skills, and rewards riders with a heightened sense of interaction with both the trail and the propinquity of the scenery.

Here the role of the environmental setting becomes critical for the experience of flow, as considered in Immonen et al.’s (2017) work on ecological dynamics in adventure sports. It is suggested that while riding on technical trails might facilitate some of the characteristics of flow, the rhythm of flowing, singletrack trails is more likely to induce all of flow’s core elements. Technical trails often require intense concentration or the application of the correct level of skill to the challenges encountered. It is in the uninterrupted ‘flow’ of smooth trails, however, enabling that unconscious sense of control over actions, where the distinction lies. Technical trails, by their very nature, are replete with obstacles diverse in nature – if the obstacles were homogenous the technical nature of the trail would be nullified. As such, the heterogeneous nature of these trails enables a level of conscious application to interpret, process and exert the correct manoeuvres.

Flowing trails characterised by a general lack of obstacles and a consequent smooth cadence, conversely, offer the potentiality for uninterrupted and continuous unconscious bike control, where nothing ‘breaks the spell’ of their performance (Brown 2012), and the ensuing loss of self-consciousness, that are both key elements of the flow experience. Through this potential loss of both self and time, it is argued that rhythmic and flowing singletrack trails are more likely playgrounds for the flow experience that rewards immersion in the action for these skilled and intrinsically motivated mountain bikers.

Conclusions

This paper sought to extend understanding of whether experienced mountain bikers seek out flow experiences on the trail or if they were incidental, if welcome, consequence. Ewert (1987) suggests that participation in adventurous activities changes with increasing experience and skill acquisition. The combination of skill and experience possessed by experienced riders enables them to surmount the inherent nervousness and concentration that can beset formative riders, and therefore at least enable, if not facilitate, the psychological conditions that characterise flow. Advanced skills sets that accompany experience and long-term engagement in mountain biking release the unconscious control over actions characteristic of flow. The research did not include an examination of beginners’ lack of skill; rather, the study participants’ reflections enabled them to articulate how their skill-set and learning evolved as they remained committed to the sport long-term – achieving satisfying levels of mastery in singletrack environments.

The experience of flow in mountain biking has been the focus of few studies to date with only Dodson (1996) and Folmer et al. (2019) have researched the issue of ‘optimal experiences’ in any depth. Without empirically testing it, Horn, Devlin, and Simmons (1994) suggested that many of the components of flow can be experienced when mountain-biking. This paper’s participants articulated such flow experiences and characteristics of flow such as mastery in the interviews, even though the study was not intended as an examination of whether or not mountain bikers actively seek flow experiences. The resulting findings revealed, however, that many of the participants clearly did feel many components of flow in open-ended discussion. A research design that more explicitly examines mountain bikers’ specific flow experiences as a motivating factor would be a worthwhile avenue for further study. While Folmer et al.’s (2019, 153) study of mountain bikers in Taiwan concluded that ‘[participants’] descriptions suggest reaching a state of flow, as they felt totally involved in the activity, and close to nature’ its research setting was the Qinghai-Tibet Highway. The paper precludes correlative findings with this research primarily as few mountain bikers would describe a highway as the ideal environmental setting for an optimal experience, unlike off-road or singletrack trails.

It is apparent from this study that the nature of the trail, and the bike itself, appear to have central agency in the riders’ experiences. The singletrack and the inanimate object – the mountain bike – become agents for flow and peak experiences, a vehicle that evokes feelings of mastery and attainment (Dodson 1996). The influence of the mountain bike as an agent, in the same manner as a professional guide enables clients to experience adventures beyond their individual capability, is worthy of future research. How advances in mountain bike technology have assisted in the experience of flow would reveal the degree of agency, fat tyres and front and rear suspension helping to smooth out rougher trails and allowing bikers to carry higher speeds on many tracks. Has the bike a dual role as an agent, both permitting higher speeds and negating the disrupting effects of surface imperfections that can inhibit the unconscious actions so characteristic of flow? This is an area of research that warrants further attention.

While elements of peak or flow experiences were reported by bikers in this study, it is suggested that having such flow experiences seems to be a welcome by-product of thrilling, challenging or risky riding, not a motivating factor in itself for mountain bikers. Indeed, Varley (2006, 178) criticised Martin and Priest’s (1986) adventure experience paradigm for placing too much emphasis on the flow experience, arguing that ‘the flow situation is really just the negotiation of a situation’s adventurous potential, and it might never happen. Flow, then, is a bonus experience in some adventures, but it is not an essential element’.

It is when a rider applies and balances their skill to the challenge ahead that they open themselves up to increased potential for a flow experience. This potential is key: it is entirely conceivable that many riders may never experience the elusive phenomenon of flow upon their mountain bike. Others may be unable to articulate or adequately describe the intrinsic rewards (such as flow) that they may have felt, nor have a need to do so. Flow is such a complex, and individual, feeling that it is understandable that riders are unlikely to account for all seven components of flow in their responses. Perhaps flow’s rare and short-lived nature, contrasting sharply with the ‘ordinary’ trail experience (Brown, Dilley, and Marshall 2008), serves to constrain bikers’ ability to describe exactly what it is they are actually experiencing.

The findings from this research, however, suggest while flow experiences were not of primary importance they were a welcome by-product of the activity that confirmed to the riders that they had achieved levels of mastery through commitment to their sport. When the right combination of skill, setting – particularly singletrack – and mountain bike as agent coalesces, the emotional and physical rewards for mountain bikers, as articulated by the participants in this study, indicate flow was indeed experienced, a peak that is otherwise so rarely felt.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Steve Taylor

Dr Steve Taylor is the Director of the Recreation and Tourism Research at West Highland College, an academic partner of the University of the Highlands & Islands, in Scotland. He principally works with partners on the development and implementation of trans-national applied research projects in tourism. He has particular research interest in nature-based tourism and mountain biking development.

Anna Carr

Dr Anna Carr is an Associate Professor in the Department of Tourism at the University of Otago. She serves as the department representative on the Otago Business School's Research Committee, is Kaiawhina Māori for the Tourism Department and Co-Director of the Centre for Recreation Research. Her current research interests are focused on tourism and recreation in protected areas, cultural landscapes and indigenous/community tourism development.