Abstract
New technologies present remarkable opportunities for flow experience. We provide an integrated theoretical framework for the study of flow in Human-Technologies Interaction referring to two specific cognitive processes – presence and social presence – whose goals are the control of the activity of the Self (presence) and the understanding of the activity of the Other (social presence). On the individual level, the chance for a technology user to enter a state of flow depends on how much the technology addresses the user’s hierarchy of intentions (presence): I am present in a real or virtual space if I manage to put my intentions into action (enacting them). On this basis, we elaborate on a new model aimed to describe how a “Perfect Interaction” (P.I.M.) takes place. On the collective level, research shows that a peculiar type of flow state could be reached by creative groups. Central to the presented model is the definition of a shared intersubjective space, which we identify with (highest level of) social presence. When this is achieved, participants can experience networked flow, an optimal state that maximizes the creative potential of the group.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Albert, W., & Tullis, T. (2013). Measuring the user experience: Collecting, analyzing, and presenting usability metrics. Indianapolis: Morgan Kaufmann.
Argenton, L., Triberti, S., Serino, S., Muzio, M., & Riva, G. (2014). Serious games as positive technologies for individual and group flourishing. In A. L. Brooks, S. Brahnam, & L. C. Jain (Eds.), Technologies of inclusive well-being (pp. 221–244). New York: Springer.
Bassi, M., Bacher, G., Negri, L., & Delle Fave, A. (2013a). The contribution of job happiness and job meaning to the well-being of workers from thriving and failing companies. Applied research in quality of life, 8(4), 427–448.
Bassi, M., Steca, P., Monzani, D., Greco, A., & Delle Fave, A. (2013b). Personality and optimal experience in adolescence: Implications for well-being and development. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(4), 829–843.
Bilgihan, A., Okumus, F., Nusair, K., & Bujisic, M. (2014). Online experiences: Flow theory, measuring online customer experience in e-commerce and managerial implications for the lodging industry. Information Technology & Tourism, 14(1), 49–71. doi:10.1007/s40558-013-0003-3.
Biocca, F., Harms, C., & Burgoon, J. (2003). Toward a more robust theory and measure of social presence: Review and suggested criteria. Presence, 12(5), 456–480.
Bordegoni, M., Ferrise, F., & Cugini, U. (2013). Development of virtual prototypes based on visuo/tactile interaction for the preliminary evaluation of consumer products usage. In CIRP design 2012 (pp. 149–158). New York: Springer.
Cavanagh, R., & Shernoff, D. (2014). Positive change and scholastic education. In P. Inghilleri, G. Riva, & E. Riva (Eds.), Enabling positive change: Flow and complexity in daily experience. Berlin: De Gruyter Open.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Csikszentmihalyi, I. S. (1992). Optimal experience: Psychological studies of flow in consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Da Silva, T. S., Martin, A., Maurer, F., & Silveira, M. S. (2011). User-centered design and agile methods: A systematic review. In AGILE, 2011 (pp. 77–86).
Davide, F., Triberti, S., & Collovà, F. (2014). Exchanging social information in online social games. In M. C. Angelides & H. Agius (Eds.), Handbook of digital games (pp. 197–234). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Finneran, C. M., & Zhang, P. (2003). A person–artefact–task (PAT) model of flow antecedents in computer-mediated environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59(4), 475–496.
Finneran, C. M., & Zhang, P. (2005). Flow in computer-mediated environments: Promises and challenges. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 15(1), 4.
Gaggioli, A., Milani, L., Mazzoni, E., & Riva, G. (2011). Networked flow: A framework for understanding the dynamics of creative collaboration in educational and training settings. Open Education Journal, 4(1), M3.
Gaggioli, A., Riva, G., Milani, L., & Mazzoni, E. (2013a). Analyzing the experience of networked flow through social network analysis. In Networked flow (pp. 71–99). New York: Springer.
Gaggioli, A., Riva, G., Milani, L., & Mazzoni, E. (2013b). The emergence of networked flow. In Networked flow (pp. 55–70) New York: Springer.
Gaggioli, A., Mazzoni, E., Milani, L., & Riva, G. (2015). The creative link: Investigating the relationship between social network indices, creative performance and flow in blended teams. Computers in Human Behavior, 42, 157–166.
Garrett, J. J. (2010). Elements of user experience, the: User-centered design for the Web and beyond. New York: Pearson Education.
Ho, L.-A., & Kuo, T.-H. (2010). How can one amplify the effect of e-learning? An examination of high-tech employees’ computer attitude and flow experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(1), 23–31.
Katz, J. E. (2002). Machines that become us: The social context of personal communication technology. Piscataway: Transaction Publishers.
Kossinets, G., & Watts, D. J. (2006). Empirical analysis of an evolving social network. Science, 311(5757), 88–90.
Koufaris, M. (2002). Applying the technology acceptance model and flow theory to online consumer behavior. Information Systems Research, 13(2), 205–223.
Liu, S.-H., Liao, H.-L., & Pratt, J. A. (2009). Impact of media richness and flow on e-learning technology acceptance. Computers & Education, 52(3), 599–607.
Lowdermilk, T. (2013). User-centered design: A developer’s guide to building user-friendly applications. Sebastopol: O’Reilly Media.
Manca, S., Delfino, M., & Mazzoni, E. (2009). Coding procedures to analyse interaction patterns in educational web forums. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(2), 189–200.
Mauri, M., Cipresso, P., Balgera, A., Villamira, M., & Riva, G. (2011). Why is facebook so successful? Psychophysiological measures describe a core flow state while using facebook. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 14(12), 723–731.
Miaskiewicz, T., & Kozar, K. A. (2011). Personas and user-centered design: How can personas benefit product design processes? Design Studies, 32(5), 417–430.
O’Quin, K., & Besemer, S. P. (1989). The development, reliability, and validity of the revised creative product semantic scale. Creativity Research Journal, 2(4), 267–278.
Pace, S. (2004). A grounded theory of the flow experiences of Web users. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 60(3), 327–363.
Pacherie, E. (2006). Toward a dynamic theory of intentions. In S. Pockett, W. P. Banks, & S. Gallagher (Eds.), Does consciousness cause behavior? (pp. 145–167). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Pacherie, E. (2008). The phenomenology of action: A conceptual framework. Cognition, 107(1), 179–217.
Pavlas, D., Heyne, K., Bedwell, W., Lazzara, E., & Salas, E. (2010). Game-based learning: the impact of flow state and videogame self-efficacy. In Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, 2010 (Vol. 54, pp. 2398–2402, Vol. 28). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications
Riva, G. (2009). Is presence a technology issue? Some insights from cognitive sciences. Virtual Reality, 13(3), 159–169.
Riva, G., & Mantovani, F. (2014). Extending the self through the tools and the others: A general framework for presence and social presence in mediated interactions. In G. Riva, J. Waterworth, & D. Murray (Eds.), Interacting with presence: HCI and the sense of presence in computer-mediated environments. Berlin: De Gruyter Open.
Riva, G., & Waterworth, J. (2014). Being present in a virtual world. In M. Grimshaw (Ed.), The oxford handbook of virtuality (p. 205). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Riva, G., Waterworth, J. A., & Waterworth, E. L. (2004). The layers of presence: A bio-cultural approach to understanding presence in natural and mediated environments. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(4), 402–416.
Riva, G., Castelnuovo, G., & Mantovani, F. (2006). Transformation of flow in rehabilitation: The role of advanced communication technologies. Behavior Research Methods, 38(2), 237–244.
Riva, G., Waterworth, J. A., Waterworth, E. L., & Mantovani, F. (2011). From intention to action: The role of presence. New Ideas in Psychology, 29(1), 24–37.
Riva, G., Banos, R. M., Botella, C., Wiederhold, B. K., & Gaggioli, A. (2012). Positive technology: Using interactive technologies to promote positive functioning. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 15(2), 69–77.
Riva, G., Gaggioli, A., Villani, D., Cipresso, P., Repetto, C., Serino, S., et al. (2014). Positive technology for healthy living and active ageing. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 203, 44–56.
Sawyer, R. K. (2007). Group genius: The creative power of collaboration. New York: Basic Books.
Sawyer, R. K. (2014). Group creativity: Music, theater, collaboration. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schmidt, J. A., Shernoff, D. J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). Individual and situational factors related to the experience of flow in adolescence. In Applications of flow in human development and education (pp. 379–405). New York: Springer.
Scott, J. (2011). Social network analysis: Developments, advances, and prospects. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 1(1), 21–26.
Searle, J. (1990). Collective intentionality. In P.R. Cohen, J. Morgan & M.E. Pollack (Eds.), Intentions in Communication. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. New York: Wiley.
Snyder, C. (2003). Paper prototyping: The fast and easy way to design and refine user interfaces. Indianapolis: Morgan Kaufmann.
Triberti, S., & Argenton, L. (2013). Psicologia dei videogiochi. Milan: Apogeo.
Triberti, S., & Liberati, E. G. (2014). Patient centered virtual reality: An opportunity to improve the quality of patient’s experience. In P. Cipresso & S. Serino (Eds.), Virtual reality: Technologies medical applications and challenges. New York: Nova Science.
Triberti, S., & Riva, G. (2015). Engaging users to design positive technologies for patient engagement: The perfect interaction model. In G. Graffigna, S. Barello, & S. Triberti (Eds.), Patient engagement: A consumer-centered model to innovate healthcare. Berlin: De Gruyter Open.
Wilson, C. (2013). Interview techniques for UX practitioners: A user-centered design method. Indianapolis: Morgan Kaufmann.
Winograd, T., & Flores, F. (1986). Understanding computers and cognition: A new foundation for design. Menlo Park: Addison-Wesley.
Wood, L. E. (1997). Semi-structured interviewing for user-centered design. Interactions, 4(2), 48–61.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Triberti, S., Chirico, A., Riva, G. (2016). New Technologies as Opportunities for Flow Experience: A Framework for the Analysis. In: Harmat, L., Ørsted Andersen, F., Ullén, F., Wright, J., Sadlo, G. (eds) Flow Experience. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28634-1_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28634-1_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-28632-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-28634-1
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)