The Construct and Criterion Validity for Being “In-The-Zone” Leading
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE CONSTRUCT AND CRITERION VALIDITY FOR BEING “IN-THE-ZONE” LEADING TO OPTIMAL ACADEMIC AND JOB PERFORMANCE by AMEY SUDHIR KULKARNI (Under the Direction of Leonard L. Martin) ABSTRACT Flow is a state of complete focus and immersion with the activity at hand. It is commonly referred to as “being in the zone.” Flow has been a key component of the recent positive psychology movement and the downstream effects of flow include greater happiness, more creativity, and reduced defensiveness. An overview of the research on flow and more specifically, an overview of the research on flow at work is provided. Previous research, however, has failed to illustrate why flow produces positive outcomes. This paper outlines the origins of the flow experience using anthropological evidence consistent with I-D Compensation Theory. Next, the results of two studies are presented to demonstrate that optimal experience (i.e., flow) leads to optimal performance. Study one surveyed undergraduate students and clarified the construct of flow, established discriminant validity from engagement, and showed flow as a significant predictor of academic performance and citizenship behavior. Study two surveyed an adult working population and established the criterion validity of flow to job performance and organizational citizenship behavior. More specifically, higher levels of flow in dockworkers and drivers lead to fewer costly accidents and greater productivity over and above engagement alone. Also, flow mediated the relationship between engagement and organizational citizenship behavior. Theoretical and practical implications for flow in academics and in the workplace are discussed. INDEX WORDS: flow, engagement, academic performance, job performance THE CONSTRUCT AND CRITERION VALIDITY FOR BEING “IN-THE-ZONE” LEADING TO OPTIMAL ACADEMIC AND JOB PERFORMANCE by AMEY SUDHIR KULKARNI B.S., University of Georgia, 2010 M.S., University of Georgia, 2013 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ATHENS, GEORGIA 2015 © 2015 Amey Sudhir Kulkarni All Rights Reserved THE CONSTRUCT AND CRITERION VALIDITY FOR BEING “IN-THE-ZONE” LEADING TO OPTIMAL ACADEMIC AND JOB PERFORMANCE by AMEY SUDHIR KULKARNI Major Professor: Leonard L. Martin Committee: Karl W. Kuhnert Douglas A. Kleiber Electronic Version Approved: Julie Coffield Interim Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia May 2015 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I want to thank my advisor Dr. Leonard Martin for giving me a chance to “follow my bliss.” I also want to thank Dr. Karl Kuhnert and Dr. Douglas Klieber for their encouragement and support. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................... viii LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... ix CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................1 The Flow Experience ...............................................................................................2 2 CONDITIONS FOR FLOW ..........................................................................................4 Match of Skill and Challenge ..................................................................................4 Clear Goals ...............................................................................................................5 Immediate Feedback ................................................................................................6 3 EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE .............................................................................................7 4 FLOW AT WORK .......................................................................................................10 Matching Skill and Challenge ................................................................................10 Implementing Clear Goals .....................................................................................13 Incorporating Immediate Feedback .......................................................................15 Work Engagement .................................................................................................18 Empirical Evidence for Flow at Work ...................................................................20 5 CONNECTION TO EVOLUTIONARY PAST ..........................................................23 Some Features of Immediate-Return Hunter-Gatherers ........................................25 v Immediate-Return and Flow ..................................................................................27 Transitioning to a Delayed-Return World .............................................................29 Flow in a Delayed-Return World ...........................................................................32 6 I-D COMPENSATION THEORY ..............................................................................35 7 EMPIRICAL IMPLICATIONS OF FLOW ................................................................39 8 STUDY ONE ...............................................................................................................45 Hypothesis One: Testing the Hybrid-Computational Model .................................51 Hypothesis Two: Establishing Discriminant Validity ...........................................59 Hypothesis Three: Flow Engagement, Student Performance and OCB ................59 9 STUDY TWO ..............................................................................................................65 Discriminant Validity .............................................................................................70 Flow, Engagement, and Job Performance in Dockworkers ...................................72 Flow, Engagement, and Job Performance in Drivers ............................................76 Flow, Engagement, and OCB ................................................................................83 Sources of Immediate-Feedback and Clear Goals .................................................85 10 GENEREAL DISCUSSION ........................................................................................87 Summary of Findings .............................................................................................87 Theoretical and Practical Implications ...................................................................90 Flow and Our Immediate-Return Biology .............................................................92 Conclusion .............................................................................................................93 REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................95 APPENDICES A MODIFIED DISPOSITIONAL FLOW SCALE-2 ....................................................107 vi B UTRECHT WORK ENGAGMENT SCALE FOR STUDENTS (UWES-S) ...........109 C ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR CHECKLIST FOR STUDENTS...............................................................................................................110 D FLOW ITEMS USED FOR EMPLOYEES ..............................................................111 E UTRECHT WORK ENGAGMENT SCALE (UWES) .............................................112 F OCB ITEMS USED FOR EMPLOYEES .................................................................113 vii LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1: MODEL FIT SUMMARIES AND COMPARISONS OF NINE-FACTOR AND GLOBAL FLOW ...............................................................................................................58 Table 2: MODEL FIT SUMMARIES AND COMPARISONS OF HYBRID- COMPUTATIONAL AND GLOBAL FLOW ..................................................................58 Table 3: HIERARCHICAL REGRESSION OF GPA ON ENGAGEMENT, FLOW, BALANCE, AND SAT ..........................................................................................................................62 Table 4: CORRELATIONS OF FLOW, BALANCE, ENGAGEMENT, AND JOB PERFROMANCE FOR DOCKWORKERS .....................................................................73 Table 5: CORRELATIONS OF FLOW, BALANCE, ENGAGEMENT, AND JOB PERFROMANCE FOR DRIVERS ...................................................................................73 Table 6: HIERARCHICAL REGRESSION OF JOB PERFORMANCE METRICS ON ENGAGEMENT AND FLOW FOR DOCKWORKERS .................................................79 Table 7: HIERARCHICAL REGRESSION OF JOB PERFORMANCE METRICS ON ENGAGEMENT AND BALANCE FOR DOCKWORKERS..........................................80 Table 8: HIERARCHICAL REGRESSION OF JOB PERFORMANCE METRICS ON ENGAGEMENT AND FLOW FOR DRIVERS ...............................................................81 Table 9: HIERARCHICAL REGRESSION OF JOB PERFORMANCE METRICS ON ENGAGEMENT AND BALANCE FOR DOCKWORKERS..........................................82 viii LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1: NINE-FACTOR MODEL OF FLOW ............................................................................55 Figure 2: GLOBAL FACTOR MODEL OF FLOW .....................................................................56 Figure 3: HYBRID-COMPUTATIONAL MODEL OF FLOW ...................................................57