Self-Directed Learning and Psychological Flow Regarding the Differences Among Athletes, Musicians, and Researchers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to learn independently—self-directed learning (SDL)—most appropriately is learning individuals personally select based on what they value in contrast to solitary learning from the lack of a teacher or being encouraged to engage in it by educators or parents considering it a necessary educational strategy. Value-guided SDL has the potential to achieve psychological flow in a way that other independent learning does not. Flow is an outcome identified and investigated by psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. Among those whose flow he studied were individuals who engaged in self-directed activities—athletes, musicians, and researchers. As its aim, this study compares the reports of athletes, musicians, and researchers of Csikszentmihalyi through a qualitative narrative analysis of his relevant forty-seven-year publication record. The results reveal a significant difference between those who experience flow from a performance of their achieved skills and those who experience flow while learning. This examination of Csikszentmihalyi’s studies of athletes and musicians reveals that they are most likely to experience flow during performances of their mastered skills, unlike researchers, whose flow depends on the process of learning—a distinction unmentioned by Csikszentmihalyi. Although athletes and musicians may self-direct their careers, only the flow of researchers corresponds with SDL. This result meaningfully extends the literature on SDL and flow, offering direction for future empirical studies and educational opportunities.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".