Experiences and Perceptions of Regular Floatation-REST Users: Results from an Online Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective Since the 1980s, flotation Restricted Environmental Stimulation Therapy (REST) has gained international recognition, particularly with the advent of modern flotation tanks using Epsom salt for buoyancy. Concurrent clinical studies have demonstrated the efficacy of flotation REST in treating various conditions, including depression, anxiety, and pain. Despite its growing popularity, the motivations, experiences, and insights of regular flotation REST users remain underexplored. This study aims to investigate these aspects in detail. Design Between 6th January and 30th April 2023, a comprehensive online questionnaire was administered. The 23 questions covered various aspects of flotation practices, such as frequency, average duration, and perceived benefits, including stress reduction, sleep improvement, and pain management. Demographic data, including gender, age, and occupation, were also collected. Additionally, participants were invited to suggest potential areas for future research into flotation-REST therapy. Results In total 83 regular floating users provided an answer, stemming from the following countries, the UK (52), Canada (7), Australia (6), New Zealand (5), Ireland (4), Belgium, Serbia and Portugal (each 1) and 1 undeclared. The majority of participants were female (63.4%), with a significant number aged between 26 and 55 years. About 70% of participants reported they would prefer to float 1-7 times a week if not limited by time or money, though current usage was mostly 1-3 times a month, coinciding with typical membership plans at float centers. The survey revealed that about 65.1% of participants typically engage in flotation sessions lasting 30 to 60 minutes, while 28.9% opt for sessions between 61 to 90 minutes. In terms of experience with regular flotation, the largest group, accounting for 26.5% of respondents has been practicing for 3-5 years. The perceived benefits of floating were high levels of relaxation (91.6%), stress reduction (77.1%) and time without external stimulus (67.5%). Other significant benefits included mental clarity (56.6%), sleep improvement (55.4%), anxiety (47.0%), pain management (33.7%) and depression (21.7%). Furthermore benefits of personal growth were noted, for example a deeper connection to self (53.0%) and spiritual development (44.6%). The majority of participants (53.0%) experienced those benefits for 1 - 4 days, followed by 33.7% where the benefits lasted between 2 - 23 hours. The majority of participnats were very supportive of new research, for example, the majority of respondents (84.1%) recommended research on stress reduction in general. Other significant areas of interest include burn-out prevention, trauma/Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD),each receiving 73.2% of responses, and anxiety (70.7%). Reported side effects (25.5%) were all very minor. Conclusion Flotation therapy is shown to be highly valued by its regular users for its mental health benefits, notably in stress reduction and relaxation. The desire for more frequent sessions suggests that users perceive ongoing benefits that could be optimized through regular participation. The study underscores a significant interest in further research, particularly in enhancing the understanding of flotation therapy’s impacts on pain management, sleep quality, and mental health conditions like PTSD. These findings advocate for a broader public awareness and deeper scientific exploration to harness and expand the therapeutic potential of flotation therapy, making it a more accessible and recognized wellness tool.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".