↓ Skip to main content

Optimal Experience and Optimal Identity: A Multinational Study of the Associations Between Flow and Social Identity

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
141 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Optimal Experience and Optimal Identity: A Multinational Study of the Associations Between Flow and Social Identity
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00067
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yanhui Mao, Scott Roberts, Stefano Pagliaro, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Marino Bonaiuto

Abstract

Eudaimonistic identity theory posits a link between activity and identity, where a self-defining activity promotes the strength of a person's identity. An activity engaged in with high enjoyment, full involvement, and high concentration can facilitate the subjective experience of flow. In the present paper, we hypothesized in accordance with the theory of psychological selection that beyond the promotion of individual development and complexity at the personal level, the relationship between flow and identity at the social level is also positive through participation in self-defining activities. Three different samples (i.e., American, Chinese, and Spanish) filled in measures for flow and social identity, with reference to four previously self-reported activities, characterized by four different combinations of skills (low vs. high) and challenges (low vs. high). Findings indicated that flow was positively associated with social identity across each of the above samples, regardless of participants' gender and age. The results have implications for increasing social identity via participation in self-defining group activities that could facilitate flow.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Unknown 137 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 21%
Student > Master 22 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 9%
Student > Bachelor 10 7%
Student > Postgraduate 7 5%
Other 31 22%
Unknown 29 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 30 21%
Social Sciences 21 15%
Business, Management and Accounting 10 7%
Neuroscience 10 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 5%
Other 26 18%
Unknown 37 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 January 2021.
All research outputs
#7,226,436
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#10,437
of 29,839 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,792
of 297,901 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#238
of 520 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,839 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 297,901 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 520 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.