Are We in Flow Neurophysiological Correlates of Flow States in a Collaborative Game
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Playing video games with a partner can be fun, but are the players in flow? The study of flow, a state of intense immersion in an activity, is an important element of game research. Recently, partners in multiplayer games have been shown to impact a player's flow state. However, as flow can be difficult to assess during a game, brain activity, measured with electroencephalography, has recently been employed as a tool to evaluate flow state continuously and without bias. Thus, this paper investigates the relationship between two partners' flow states and brain activity. We carried out a preliminary empirical study in which participants played doubles in a tennis game, while EEG data and psychometric measures were acquired. Our results show an interaction between a player's neurophysiological activity and a partner's flow state. In the long run, this work opens the door for games designed to optimize positive emotional contagion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it