982056

research-article2020
POM0010.1177/0305735620982056Psychology of MusicLoepthien and Leipold

Article

Psychology of Music

Flow in music performance and

1­–16
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
music-listening: Differences in sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0305735620982056
https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735620982056
intensity, predictors, and the journals.sagepub.com/home/pom

relationship between flow and

subjective well-being

Tim Loepthien and Bernhard Leipold

Abstract
Flow describes a state of total absorption in an activity. This optimal experience has received much
attention in research on music-playing and performing, but not on interindividual differences
in music-listening. We expect differences in the intensity of flow between performing music
and listening to music and in the relationships with subjective well-being. In Study 1 (N = 207;
questionnaire study), we investigated differences in flow between performing and listening to music
in three dimensions of flow. We analyzed correlations between flow, previous musical training, music
experience, and subjective well-being. Participants reported a more intense flow experience while
listening to music than while performing music. Flow was significantly associated with subjective
well-being and music experience. For performing music, flow was positively correlated with
previous musical practice. Study 2 (N = 383; questionnaire study) focused on flow while listening
to music and subjective well-being, and on the role a flexible self-concept plays in this phenomenon.
Stronger relationships between flow and subjective well-being were obtained for individuals with
a highly flexible self-concept. Flow was positively correlated with music experience. The results
provided evidence for relationships between flow, previous musical practice, and music experience.
Correlations with subjective well-being depend on processes of self-regulation.

Keywords
flow, music-listening, well-being, musical engagement, performing music

Common descriptions of the feeling of complete absorption in musical activities, referred to as

flow (Nakamura & Csikszentmihalyi, 2002), include forgetting about time when playing an
instrument, not caring about anything else but the music one is listening to and feeling
extremely good about playing music. Previous research concerning flow and musical activities

Universität der Bundeswehr München, Neubiberg, Germany

Corresponding author:
Tim Loepthien, Universität der Bundeswehr München, Werner-Heisenberg-Weg 39, 85577 Neubiberg, Germany.
Email: tim.loepthien@unibw.de
2 Psychology of Music 00(0)

examined this state mostly in terms of situational and/or individual factors that facilitate its
experience and its effects on various psychological processes (Manzano, de Theorell, Harmat, &
Ullén, 2010; Pates, Karageorghis, Fryer, & Maynard, 2003; Sinnett, Jäger, Singer, & Antonini
Philippe, 2020; Valenzuela, Codina, & Pestana, 2018). Most studies focused on music-playing,
either in private or in performance or examination settings, but only a few on listening to music
(Chirico, Serino, Cipresso, Gaggioli, & Riva, 2015; Pates et  al., 2003). This paper therefore
intends to take a first step, using self-reports comparing flow in music-playing with flow in
music-listening, with a special emphasis on performing music. Broadening the focus to aspects
of music-listening is important, especially when one considers the relevance of listening to
music in everyday life. Another major line of research investigated flow experienced in musical
activities in relation to subjective well-being (Croom, 2015; Georgi, von Bötsch, & Fedorov,
2016; Heller, Bullerjahn, & von Georgi, 2015; Smolej Fritz & Avsec, 2007). This line of research
repeatedly showed a relationship between flow and subjective well-being. Again, previous
research examined mostly music-playing, although listening to music could also be a potential
source of well-being, possibly to a larger number of people. In this paper, we report two studies
that investigated (1) differences in flow between performing music and music-listening and (2)
the relationships between flow and well-being, especially for music-listening.

Flow and musical activity

Flow is described as a state of total absorption in an activity (Nakamura & Csikszentmihalyi,
2002), resulting from a perceived match of the challenges of an activity and personal skills.
The experience of flow occurs when an individual is challenged by a given task that requires
skills that are available. According to Csikszentmihalyi and LeFevre (1989), in order to evoke
flow, an activity also needs to exceed the weekly average of challenges met and skills needed (see
also Moneta, 2012). Furthermore, other affective states resulting from engagement in a given
task can be distinguished from flow on this challenge-skill dimension. For example, if a situa-
tion is very challenging but one does not have the required skills, anxiety is more likely to be
experienced –rather than flow; on the other hand, a situation may lead to apathy if both chal-
lenges and available skills are low. In addition to being challenging and requiring available
skills, the task needs to be interesting and relevant for the person to not result in boredom
(Moneta, 2012). Numerous studies on musical activities indicate that playing an instrument is
a flow-evoking activity: it complies with the aforementioned prerequisites by challenging one’s
skills and being a relevant task for instrumentalists (Chirico et  al., 2015; Gaggioli, Chirico,
Mazzoni, Milani, & Riva, 2017; Hart & Di Blasi, 2015; Manzano et al., 2010; O’Neill, 1999;
Smolej Fritz & Avsec, 2007; Valenzuela et al., 2018).
Few studies have examined flow while listening to music. In an interview-study, Lamont
(2011) found that participants, while listening to music, experienced flow-like states which
they described as being absorbed by the music and losing a sense of the surroundings. In addi-
tion, the interviewees stated that flow often occurs in situations in which they were concentrat-
ing on the music. Diaz (2011) found that flow was a common reaction after listening to music
but can be decreased by a previous mindfulness training. Analyzing participant’s description of
the flow-experience, Diaz found that participants were focussing more on the cognitive aspect
of flow, which might have decreased its affective component and thus the overall intensity of
the flow-experience. Another explanation could be that music-listening may lose its autotelic
character (finding pleasure in the act of music-listening itself), when combined with another,
potentially conflicting activity. Both studies demonstrated that concentrating on the music
increases the likelihood of experiencing flow and stress the importance of an intense
Loepthien and Leipold 3

engagement with the music to experience flow while listening. A high level of concentration
and engagement in music-listening is also seen to be an important prerequisite for music-listen-
ing to evoke flow, as otherwise one can hardly experience a state of absorption (Csikszentmihalyi,
2009). Ruth, Spangardt, and Schramm (2016) provided empirical evidence for the influence of
a concentrated form of music-listening (analytical music-listening) on flow, that is, lower levels
of analytical listening reduce flow when listening to complex music. Bernardi, Bellemare-Pepin,
and Peretz (2018) investigated the occurrence of flow while either listening and dancing to
music or listening to music without moving. The results here showed that music listening does
evoke flow, depending on the music listened to.
In sum, research on flow resulting from listening to music is scarce, which also was appar-
ent in a systematic review of research on flow and musical activities (Chirico et al., 2015).
Here, the authors report only one study that investigated flow while listening to music.
Furthermore, no research investigated whether the experience of flow while playing music,
especially in a concert performance with an audience, differs from the experience while lis-
tening to music.

Differences in flow between performing and listening to music

Performing music pertains to situations of performing in public and, thus, social evaluation.
These public situations might evoke negative emotions that reflect the social nature of the per-
formance (LeBlanc et  al., 1997). Supporting this, Wrigley and Emmerson (2013) found that
during performance exams, in which individuals are probably focusing mainly on the accuracy
of their performance, the majority of music students experience low amounts of flow or even
none at all. As negative emotions can lead to an increased focus on oneself, they can prevent the
individual from experiencing flow (Fullagar, Knight, & Sovern, 2013). Congruent with this
assumption, S. Cohen and Bodner (2019) found a significant negative relationship between flow
and performance anxiety among classical orchestral musicians. In contrast, music-listening
often takes place in solitude and, thus, without social evaluation. Even in situations of listening
to music where others are present, it is not likely that these “others” evaluate the listener’s per-
formance; this reduces the probability of negative emotions resulting from social evaluative pro-
cesses. Hence, emotions like shame or anxiety are unlikely to be evoked. Without these negative
emotions, it may be easier to lose oneself in the activity of listening to music, which may in turn
increase the probability and intensity of experiencing flow. In sum, we assume that flow also
occurs while listening to music, provided listening is done with concentration. We furthermore
expect differences between flow in performing and flow in listening to music, with a higher likeli-
hood for flow to occur with the latter activity due to the social and evaluative nature of music
performances.

Flow, previous musical training, and musical reception

Flow has been defined as a state of total absorption in certain actions, and it is sensitive to any
kind of distraction. In the case of musical activities, this means that a musician is less likely to
experience flow when she needs to concentrate on the movements necessary to play the piece
(Wrigley & Emmerson, 2013). Given this detrimental effect on flow in playing and performing,
we assume higher levels of previous musical training (PMT) could counteract this and enhance
the experience of flow.
In the sections above, we described the necessity of focussing on the present activity to
experience flow. With regard to PMT, a further clarification is necessary. During performance,
4 Psychology of Music 00(0)

a musician might also be distracted by cognitions not even related to the music being played
(e.g., trouble in social relationships). The same holds true for music-listening. If one listens to
music in the background, concentration is divided to a degree that could impede entering a
state of flow. We therefore assume that those situations in which music is the major activity
and the listener is thus intensely engaged with the music are likely to facilitate a state of total
absorption. The terms music experience (Behne, 1997) or music reception generally describe
how and for what purposes individuals listen to music, that is, the kind of music-related situ-
ations they regularly seek and/or create (Gardikiotis & Baltzis, 2012; Leipold & Loepthien,
2015). We use the term musical reception (MR) to denote listening habits or interindividual
differences in the use of music. Previous research has shown these differences in MR to
covary with personality, general affect, and uses of music-listening (Chamorro-Premuzic &
Furnham, 2007; Getz, Chamorro-Premuzic, Roy, & Devroop, 2012). However, these studies
refer mainly to cognitive (attentive-analytical music-listening) and affective (emotional
music-listening) facets of MR. As listening to music also takes place in social situations
(North, Hargreaves, & Hargreaves, 2004), the present research includes social aspects of
MR. In sum, a heightened involvement in listening to music has been discussed as an ante-
cedent of flow in music-listening (Csikszentmihalyi, 2009) and we therefore expect that MR
is positively correlated with flow.

Flow and subjective well-being

Research on flow resulting from playing music has repeatedly shown it to be related to greater
subjective well-being (Ascenso, Perkins, Atkins, Fancourt, & Williamon, 2018; Croom, 2015;
Georgi et al., 2016; Habe, Biasutti, & Kajtna, 2019; Heller et al., 2015; Smolej Fritz & Avsec,
2007). Surprisingly though, to our knowledge the relationship between subjective well-being
and flow from listening to music has not been investigated, although this musical activity is
much more prominent in everyday-life and may thus be a possible source of well-being for
many people. Given the evidence for a positive relationship between flow and well-being in play-
ing music, one could assume a comparable pattern for music-listening. On the other hand, we
assume playing a musical instrument to be more central to one’s self-definition than music-
listening. A direct and substantial effect on overall well-being therefore appears less plausible
for music-listening, and makes it necessary to investigate underlying processes. To date,
research aimed at a thorough understanding of the causality or mechanisms of the possible
relationship between flow and well-being is scarce. We argue that a flexible self-concept (FSC;
Brandtstädter & Rothermund, 2002; Martin & Anderson, 1998) can serve as a moderator
between flow and general well-being. FSC describes an individual’s ability to adjust to unfore-
seen events and to regard a given situation from different perspectives. Several studies have
demonstrated that accommodative processes (positive reappraisal, downward comparison,
reorientation) are associated with subjective well-being (Brandtstädter & Rothermund, 2002)
because individuals are able to adjust their standards flexibly in the face of difficulties (stress,
age-related losses). One goal of the present study is to examine whether the emotion-regulating
functions of accommodation unfold particularly well in individuals who report a high degree
of flow. We assume this because, similar to positive emotions, flow broadens the attentional
focus and thus information processing. These in turn are a prerequisite for FSC and well-being
(Fredrickson, 2002). On the other hand, one could also argue that an accommodative self-
concept enhances the link between music-induced flow and general well-being, possibly
because this interconnected self-concept could serve as prerequisite, enabling individuals to
apply domain-specific emotions to general well-being.
Loepthien and Leipold 5

Hypotheses
The following hypotheses will be tested:

1. Flow differs in intensity between performing and listening to music. In contrast to per-
forming, music-listening does not involve social evaluations. We therefore expect a more
intense experience of flow while listening to music.
2. More pronounced engagement in music-listening (MR, hypothesis 2a) and previous
musical practice and training (PMT, hypothesis 2b) are positively correlated with flow
during musical activity. Both low levels of MR and PMT prevent the individual from get-
ting absorbed by the musical activity.
3. Flow while performing or listening to music is positively correlated with subjective
well-being.
4. Flow is positively correlated with a flexible self-concept (FSC).
5. The relationship between flow while listening to music and subjective well-being is mod-
erated by FSC. High levels of FSC increase the relationship between flow and subjective
well-being.

Hypotheses 1, 2, and 3 were examined by comparing the information from questionnaires

from two groups who were asked about flow either when performing or when listening to music
(Study 1). Hypothesis 4 and 5 result from Study 2, investigating solely music-listening.

Study 1
Participants
Participants were recruited via personal networks, German-speaking online chatrooms for
musicians, and online-platforms for social research in Germany. We aimed at a sample consist-
ing of individuals who were interested in music and recruited participants who either actively
played an instrument (and performed regularly, e.g., in public or in a band) or participants who
were interested in and regularly listened to music. Since no study yet compares flow when per-
forming and listening, we first focused in a self-report study on whether any differences between
music performing and listening were reported at all. Criterion for inclusion to participate in the
study was a specific level of music education on the basis of the subscale “musical training”
(Schaal, Bauer, & Müllensiefen, 2014, see below for details). To make both groups somewhat
comparable, we used a score of at least 2.5, which meant that almost all had learned or played
an instrument.
The total sample consisted of N = 207 participants that matched these criteria. Overall, the
participants’ age was between 19 and 80 years (M = 49.1, SD = 15.5); 44% were female and
56% male (one participant did not answer this question). Seven percent of the participants had
a low level of education, with nine or fewer years of schooling, 19% had a medium level of
education with 10 years of schooling, and 73% had a high level of education with 12 or more
years of education (German equivalent to university entrance level or A-levels). The question-
naire study was distributed online. Participants were assigned to one of the two conditions,
based on whether they played an instrument or frequently listened to music. Participants were
assigned to Group 1 (performing music; n = 105) if they actively and regularly played an
instrument and currently performed. They were asked about their flow when they perform
musically. Participants were assigned to Group 2 (listening group; n = 102) if they regularly
6 Psychology of Music 00(0)

listened to music. This group also included participants who played an instrument, but have no
regular performance practice. They were asked about flow while listening to music (see below
for detailed instructions). Participants in the music-performance condition were, on an aver-
age, slightly older (M = 51.5, SD = 14.2) than those in the music-listening condition (M =
46.6, SD = 16.4), t(205) = 2.28, p = .02. No differences were found for sex, χ2(1) = .02, p =
.90, and musical training, t(205) = 0.40, p = .69. Participation was voluntary. Participants
were informed about the general topic of the research prior to the survey, and they received a
detailed description of the research question at the end of the survey questionnaire. The study
is part of a larger research project on music-listening, perceived resources, and subjective well-
being. The ethical review board of the Universität der Bundeswehr München provided ethical
approval for the research project.

Materials and procedure

Flow.  To assess the experience of flow while either performing or listening to music we used an
adapted version of the Flow-State-Scale (FSS, Jackson & Marsh, 1996). The original version of
the FSS consists of 9 subscales, of which only those that were expected to play a role both for
music playing and music listening were used, namely, Action-Awareness-Merging (e.g.,
“Things just seemed to be happening automatically.”), Concentration on Task (e.g., “It was no
effort to keep my mind on what was happening.”), and Autotelic Experience (e.g., “I really
enjoyed the experience.”). Due to time restrictions in the online assessment, we excluded the
scales: Challenge-Skill Balance, and Paradox of Control because of their limited applicability to
listening situations. We did not use the Transformation of Time scale because it was not clear
whether speeded or slowed experience would be measured and aspects of losing track of time
and surroundings are implicitly included in other scales (e.g., concentration on task). We also
used the subscales Clear Goals, Unambiguous Feedback, and Loss of Self-Consciousness but
because these scales refer to a performance situation, some adjustments were necessary to
make the items applicable for listening situations. In fact, the 8-item version that we used was
a good approximation for the 24 items. Control analyses revealed that both scales were highly
correlated (rs > . 90) in both groups and the differences in the mean values were not signifi-
cant. Because the statements in many of the FSS-items refer to activities that cannot be applied
to listening situations (e.g., “I made the correct movements without thinking about trying to do
so.”), we only used those items that are suitable for both music-playing and listening (e.g., “The
experience left me feeling great.”), resulting in a total of 8 items with good reliability (α = .91).
As flow is more likely to occur in situations that exceed the average music-playing or listening
situations, participants were instructed to think of concrete situations that match this prereq-
uisite. Both groups were instructed to think of a musical situation that they would call some-
thing special, in which they were focused on the music and that was a little more demanding
than casual listening or playing. Participants in the music-performance group were instructed
to think of a performance situation in which they played a piece that was challenging and/or
ambitious for them. Music listeners had to think of a situation in which they concentratedly
listened to a piece of music. Participants had to indicate the extent to which the item-state-
ments described their experience while performing or listening to music on a 5-point Likert-
type scale (1 = does not apply at all to 5 = applies very much).

Well-being.  Well-being was measured using the positive-affect subscale of the Job-Affect-Scale
(JAS, Burke, Brief, George, Roberson, & Webster, 1989). The JAS has been shown to be a reliable
instrument for measuring affect (Huelsman, Furr, & Nemanick, 2016). As this instrument
Loepthien and Leipold 7

assesses job-related affect, we adapted the instructions to gain a measure of overall well-being,
asking participants to state how they felt in general during the past 2 weeks, using 10 items
describing positive affective states (e.g., active, enthusiastic). Statements were made on a
5-point Likert-type scale (1 = does not apply at all to 5 = applies very much); reliability of the
resultant scale was good (α = .85).

Musical reception.  To assess the amount of MR, we measured attentive-analytical (e.g., “I try to
understand the formal structure of a piece.”), emotional (e.g., “Music often touches me emo-
tionally.”), and social aspects of music-listening (e.g., “I like to talk to friends about music.”)
with an instrument by Leipold and Loepthien (2009). This scale measures the mentioned facets
of musical experience; previous studies conducted confirmatory factor analyses on this instru-
ment, showing good model-fit parameters and intercorrelations among the three facets (Leipold
& Loepthien, 2009; Loepthien, 2015). The overall scale consists of 13 items with good reliabil-
ity (α = .89).

Previous musical training.  Because music education has been shown to affect emotional reactions
resulting from the experience of playing and listening to music, we suspected differences in the
experience of flow due to previous musical training (PMT). Especially in the case of performing
music, more music education may facilitate flow because less attentional resources are invested
in the actual playing. PMT was measured with the subscale “musical training” of the German
version of the Gold-MSI (Schaal et al., 2014). This subscale assesses seven facets of musical
education (e.g., number of instruments played, years of practice etc.) in an open-answer for-
mat. Values are then converted on a 7-point Likert-type scale with high values indicating higher
musical education (α = .69).

Results
To test hypothesis 1, we first conducted a t-test for independent samples, (i.e., differences in flow
between music-listening and -performing). As expected, the mean differences were significant
with t(205) = -3.47, p < .01, d = 0.48. Figure 1 shows that participants thinking about listen-
ing to music reported more flow than those thinking about music performances.
To investigate the relationship between flow, MR, and PMT (hypothesis 2), as well as possible
moderating effects of PMT and MR on the differences in flow between performing or listening
to music, an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was conducted. Assumptions of ANCOVA
(absence of outliers, linearity of covariates, homogeneity of variance) were tested prior to the
analysis. The assumption of homogeneity of covariates’ regression slopes was violated.
However, with a large sample size and nearly equal cell sizes, as in this study, ANCOVA is
expected to be robust against this violation (Bortz & Schuster, 2010). Because this violation is a
marker of interactions, we tested the interaction terms. Musical activity (Group 1: thinking
about a musical performance, or Group 2: concentrated listening to music) served as an inde-
pendent variable. Covariates were PMT and MR (z-transformed values). We computed the inter-
actions between the group factor and the covariates for heuristical purposes, because we were
interested in whether there would be differences in flow after performing and listening that
were associated with PMT or with MR. Table 1 shows the main effect of musical activity on
flow, which remained significant after inserting the covariates. As expected in hypotheses 2a
and 2b, both covariates (PMT and MR) significantly predicted the amount of experienced flow.
Finally, both interaction terms of musical activity and PMT as well as MR were statistically
significant.
8 Psychology of Music 00(0)

Figure 1.  Mean Differences in the Intensity of Flow Between Performing Music and Music-Listening. Error
Bars Indicate 95% Confidence Interval of Mean Values.
**p < .01.

Table 1.  Analysis of covariance of flow.

Source of variance (adj.) Adjusted df MS F η2

SS
Music group: 1 = performing, 2 = listening 11.12 1 11.12 18.38*** .08
Covariates
PMT 7.77 1 7.77 12.85*** .06
MR 24.23 1 24.23 40.06*** .17
Interactions
Group x PMT 7.58 1 7.58 12.52*** .06
Group x MR 3.29 1 3.29 5.44* .03
Error 121.58 201 0.61  

Note: N = 207. PMT: previous musical training; MR: musical reception; SS: sum of squares; MS: mean squares.
*p < .05 ***p < .001.

In order to further illustrate the significant interactions, we conducted two correlation anal-
yses separately for each musical activity group. The results show an interesting pattern: While
PMT is positively correlated with flow when performing music, r = .44, p < .001, no significant
relationship can be found for music-listening, r = .01, p > .05. For MR, a significant relation-
ship with flow can be found in both musical activity groups, albeit these relationships differ in
their effect size. Although medium in size for performing, r = .33, p < .001, for music-listening
there is a large correlation between flow and MR, r = .62, p < .001.
For hypothesis 3, we examined the bivariate correlations between flow and overall well-
being. As expected, this analysis revealed a significant relationship for the full sample, r = .18,
p < .01. However, when this relationship was examined for the two subsamples separately,
flow and overall well-being were significantly related only in the performing sample, r = .25,
p < .01; the association between listening and well-being showed only a statistical trend, r =
.18, p = .08. We therefore also compared both correlation coefficients via the cocor
Loepthien and Leipold 9

online-script (Diedenhofen & Musch, 2015), which examines two correlation coefficients from
independent groups. The result did not show a significant difference between the correlation
coefficients found in both musical activity groups, z = .52, p > .05. As participants in the
music-performance group were significantly older than those in the music-listening group, all
analyses were also conducted controlling for age. None of the results differed substantially
from those reported in the text.

Study 2
Study 1 revealed ambiguous results, mainly for experiencing flow when listening to music. On
the one hand, listening to music appeared to be a source of flow, but the picture of the relation-
ship between the positive affective experience of music-listening, and overall well-being was not
clear. In Study 2, we considered the role of a flexible self-concept, which has been shown to
predict well-being in several studies. We assumed that a low degree of flexibility is not only
associated with less flow (hypothesis 4), but also moderates the effect of a task-specific reaction
(flow) on general well-being (hypothesis 5). In addition, as Study 1 had revealed a substantial
relationship between flow, PMT and MR for music-listening, Study 2 explored hypothesis 2 in
more detail for music-listening.

Participants
Participants were recruited via personal network, German-speaking online chatrooms for musi-
cians, and online-platforms for social research in Germany. The questionnaire was distributed
online. The sample consisted of 386 participants. Due to missing values on several items, three
participants were eliminated, resulting in a total of N = 383. Participants’ ages ranged from 18
to 82 years (M = 46.0, SD = 17.1); 50 % were female and 49 % male (2 participants did not
answer this question). According to the answers given, 10% of the participants had a low level of
education, with nine or fewer years of schooling; 31% had a medium educational level with
10 years of schooling; and 57% had a high level of education with 12 or more years of education
(German Abitur). Participants were informed about the general topic of the research prior to the
survey and then received a detailed description of the research question at the end of the ques-
tionnaire. Participation was voluntary. The study is part of a larger research project on listening
to music, perceived resources, and subjective well-being. The ethics review board of the Universität
der Bundeswehr München provided ethical approval for the research project.

Materials and procedure

Flow.  Flow was assessed similarly to Study 1, yet only with respect to flow experienced while
listening to music. The resultant scale with 8 items showed good reliability (α = .90).

Well-being.  Well-being was measured with the positive affect scale of the JAS (Burke et al., 1989;
for details see Study 1). Cronbach’s alpha was .88.

Flexibility of self-concept.  To measure FSC, we used the ACCO-5 scale (Loidl & Leipold, 2019),
which is a questionnaire encompassing several facets of flexible goal adjustment. The items
relate to how people deal with situations in which goals or plans can no longer be realized. The
subscales—positive reappraisal/personal growth, lowering of aspirations/acceptance, and
reorientation—consist of 16 items and assess the general tendency to adjust one’s goals in the
10 Psychology of Music 00(0)

Table 2.  Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations of assessed variables.

M SD 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
1. Age 45.99 17.13  
2. Sex (0 = female; 1 = male) .20***  
3. PMT 2.80 1.44 −.22*** .00  
4. Flow 3.71 0.91 −.07 −.05 .20***  
5. MR 4.52 1.23 −.05 −.08 .22*** .65***  
6. FSC 5.06 1.01 .18*** .02 .07 .35*** .36***  
7. Well-being 3.27 0.73 .12* .13** .02 .13** .19*** .46***

Note: N = 383. SD: standard deviation; PMT: previous musical training; MR: musical reception; FSC: flexible self-concept.
*p < .05 **p < .01 ***p < .001.

face of threats to self-concept. Participants were asked to rate how well each item applied to
themselves on a seven-point Likert-type scale (1 = not at all, 7 = exactly; α = .94).

Musical reception.  The overall variable for MR was the same as in Study 1, using an instrument
by Leipold and Loepthien (2015). The resulting variable containing 13 items showed satisfac-
tory reliability (α = .91).

Previous musical practice.  To assess the participants’ musical education, we used the subscale
“musical education” of the German version of the Gold-MSI (Schaal et al., 2014, see Study 1).
The scale consists of 7 items with good reliability (α = .86).

Results
Overall associations between variables. Table 2 presents descriptive statistics and relationships
between the assessed variables. Participants with a higher MR experienced flow in a more pro-
nounced manner when listening to music, which confirmed hypothesis 2. PMT is related to
flow and MR, yet it does not show any relationship to FSC and well-being. In accordance with
hypotheses 3 and 4, experiencing flow when listening to music is significantly related to well-
being, and flow is related to FSC. We then tested the hypotheses in controlled analyses.
We used a regression analysis to test whether music-specific effects on flow (hypothesis 2)
are unique effects. As expected, and similar to the results of Study 1, MR significantly pre-
dicted flow (β = .64, p < .001), whereas the predictive value of PMT was not significant (β =
.06, p = .17).

Flow, FSC, and the moderating effect of FSC on the relationship between flow and well-being.  To examine
the correlations between flow and well-being (hypothesis 3), flow and FSC (hypothesis 4), and
the moderating effect of FSC on the relationship between flow and well-being (hypothesis 5), we
conducted a hierarchical regression analysis. Well-being served as criterion, while flow and
FSC were predictors (Step 1). In the second step, the interaction term between both predictors
was added, using z-standardized variables to compute the interaction term (J. Cohen, Cohen,
West, & Aiken, 2003). As age and gender showed significant correlations with FSC and well-
being (see Table 2), both variables were entered as control variables in Step 1. The results are
presented in Table 3.
In Step 1, only FSC and sex remained significant predictors of well-being; in Step 2, as pre-
dicted, the interaction between flow and FSC also significantly predicted well-being. Figure 2
Loepthien and Leipold 11

Table 3.  Hierarchical regression analysis for variables predicting well-being.

B SE B β
Step 1
 Age 0.00 .03 .00
 Sex 0.09 .03 .12**
 Flow −0.02 .04 −.03
 FSC 0.34 .04 .47***
R .48  
R2 .23  
Step 2
 Age 0.00 .03 .00
 Sex 0.08 .03 .11**
 Flow −0.02 .04 −.02
 FSC 0.36 .04 .50***
  Flow x FSC 0.07 .03 .12**
R .49  
R2 .24  
ΔR2 .01**  

Note: N = 383. B: unstandardized beta coefficient, SE B: standard error of B, β: standardized beta coefficient; FSC:
flexibility of self-concept.
**p < .01 ***p < .001.

Figure 2.  Well-Being as s Function of Flow and Self-Concept Flexibility. We Used Standard Deviations to
Categorize Fsc. Indicated Here are the Correlation-Coefficients R for Each Fsc—Sub-Group.
**p < .01.
12 Psychology of Music 00(0)

illustrates the results of this analysis. Only participants with a highly flexible self-concept
showed significantly higher overall well-being when intense flow was reported following music-
listening. Participants with medium and low values in FSC showed no covariation between flow
and well-being.

Discussion
Music-psychological research on flow has largely focused on situations in which music is played
but has given little attention to situations involving listening to music. The present studies
extend this research by investigating differences in flow between music-playing, especially in
performing and music-listening. The first study showed a more pronounced experience of flow
for listening to music as compared to performing music. These differences in flow between per-
formance and listening may reflect the different nature of the two activities. Music perfor-
mances occur in public. The results found here reflect exactly this social aspect of performing
music. In contrast, listening to music does not necessarily involve other people and, even when
others are present, they do not act as an audience that evaluates the listener’s “performance.”
Hence, music-listening involves fewer social evaluations: One does not need to reflect on one’s
performance, the right movements, and the notes to play, and this may altogether facilitate los-
ing oneself in this activity (Csikszentmihalyi, 2014). This interpretation is in accordance with
the findings concerning PMT: Whereas musicians with lower levels of musical education show
lower values of experienced flow in a performance situation, those with higher levels of music
education experience an equal intensity of flow as music listeners. Well-trained musicians
might be more experienced in public performances, which can reduce the amount of negative
emotions occurring in these situations. Furthermore, a higher musical education increases the
self-confidence of a musician and also reduces the amount of concentration needed to execute
basic movements (Papageorgi, Hallam, & Welch, 2007). These aspects may altogether increase
the likelihood of experiencing flow in a performance situation as they shift the attentional focus
away from the distracting aspects to the actual playing-experience. The difference between the
two groups in the flow experienced may also be due to the different instructions for performing
music and listening to music. In particular, asking music-listeners to think of a situation in
which they listened to music attentively and with concentration may imply flow. We have con-
trolled for interindividual differences in the tendency to listen attentively and emotionally to
music. Although the main effect of group remained significant, we cannot rule out confound-
ing factors (see limitation section).
In addition, the results of both studies support our second hypothesis: The higher the overall
engagement with music, the more intense the experienced flow. This result is in line with theo-
retical assumptions of Csikszentmihalyi (2009) who claimed that a certain amount of concen-
tration is needed to experience flow when listening to music (see also Lamont, 2011). Hence,
merely having music playing in the background does not evoke flow, but listening to music as
the main activity so that attention can be focused on the music is an important precondition for
getting into and staying in flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 2014). The results for MR found here are
also in line with Ruth et al. (2016) findings. In this study, the authors showed a negative effect
of low analytical listening on flow when listening to complex music.
In sum, we suggest that flow from music performance and music listening differs in its inten-
sity, possibly due to the more intimate and non-evaluative character of listening to music. In
contrast, the social-evaluative aspects of performing may hinder musicians from experiencing
flow, as they need to focus on their performance and may even experience negative emotions. A
high level of music education (PMT) can, however, moderate this detrimental effect in
Loepthien and Leipold 13

performing music, enabling the musician to focus solely on the playing itself and, thus, enjoy it.
It is important to note that the results of Study 1 do not show that flow is per se more intense
when listening to music but rather that the public nature of a performance situation may impede
the experience of flow. The significant interaction—that PMT is associated with flow in the per-
formance group, but not in the listening group—supports this interpretation. The results
reported here do not imply more pronounced experiences of flow when listening to music as
compared to playing music in general as we investigated solely the public aspect of making
music, namely performing. Flow is more intense when MR is high, and the focus is more on the
music while listening.
We also investigated the relationship between flow and overall well-being. In Study 1, we
found a relationship between flow following performing music and well-being, replicating
findings from previous studies investigating music performance in general (Croom, 2015;
Georgi et al., 2016; Habe et al., 2019). To our knowledge, both studies presented here are the
first steps to also investigate the relationship between overall well-being and flow while listen-
ing to music. Here, although significantly correlated, the effect-sizes were low. We therefore
investigated how the relationship between flow following music-listening and overall well-
being varies, dependent on the level of FSC. In previous studies, FSC was found to buffer stress-
or age-related impairment in general well-being (Brandtstädter, 2017; Brandtstädter & Greve,
1994). Study 2 shows that a flexible self-concept moderates the relationship between flow and
well-being in that only participants with a highly flexible self-concept showed a significant
relationship between flow and well-being. The underlying process here might lie in the effects
that positive affective reactions, like flow, have on the cognitive system. A broad attentional
focus during positive affective states possibly facilitates flexible processes (e.g., reorganization
and reinterpretation) and thus enhances the flexibility of one’s self-concept, which in turn
positively affects overall well-being (Fredrickson, 2002). Given this result, flow when listening
to music is a domain-specific affective state, which alone cannot account for higher subjective
well-being, but requires moderating cognitive factors as well. Music-listening can evoke flow
and may, in combination with a highly flexible self-concept, be a source of well-being for a
large number of people as flow while listening to music does not require high amounts of PMT.

Limitations and further research

We interpreted the differences in the intensity of experienced flow while performing or listening
to music to reflect the social, and thus, the evaluative component in performing music. Yet, as
music-listening and music-playing occur in both private and public settings, more research is
needed to examine differences between other combinations of these contexts in order to achieve
a comprehensive picture of differences in flow between music-playing and music-listening. For
example: Do musicians experience more intense flow when playing privately then in perfor-
mance situations? Can the differences in flow found in Study 1 also be found when listening
privately and playing music in a private setting are compared? These considerations further
suggest the use of within-study designs for future investigations. As this study was a first step to
investigate differences in flow between music-playing and music-listening, more research is
needed to achieve a broader picture.
Another limitation was the use of only three facets of flow. As stated before, this was neces-
sary due to time restrictions as well as to enhance the comparability of the results between flow
during music performances and listening to music. In fact, we have examined six facets of flow
and the significant results remained stable in both studies. However, because many items refer
to movements of the performers and could not simply be applied to listening situations without
14 Psychology of Music 00(0)

adjustments to the items, we decided to report the results of the shortened version. Future
research investigating flow in private versus public situations within the same musical activity
(playing or listening) should therefore consider developing scales that would be appropriate for
the various situations. The present results are based on self-report questionnaires. It would be
interesting to examine whether the differences hold true during the actual listening and play-
ing of music.
We interpreted the moderating effect of FSC on the relationship between flow and well-being
as stemming from the effects that flow has on flexible cognitive processes. Both studies con-
ducted were cross-sectional and provide no evidence for a specific causal direction. It may also
be possible that highly flexible individuals experience flow more often and intensely, and the
positive relationship between flow and well-being may indicate a cumulative effect that is based
on FSC. Longitudinal studies are needed to further explore the complex relationship between
these three variables.

Conclusion
Musical activities are potential sources of flow. This seems to hold true for both performing and
listening to music. In the case of music-listening, experiencing flow does not depend on music
education. Hence, music-listening might be a flow-evoking activity for many people. These
findings on musical activity and flow are particularly important because experiencing flow is
related to general well-being, yet in the case of music-listening, additional cognitive factors are
important for this relationship. The results of both studies suggest that musical activities are
potential sources to experience flow and may thus, in the long-term, contribute to a happy and
fulfilled life.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Amy Michéle-Malkowsky for many discussions and two anonymous
reviewers for their comments on a draft of the manuscript.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research authorship and/or publication of this
article.

ORCID iD
Tim Loepthien https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5002-0702

References
Ascenso, S., Perkins, R., Atkins, L., Fancourt, D., & Williamon, A. (2018). Promoting well-being through
group drumming with mental health service users and their carers. International Journal of Qualitative
Studies on Health and Well-Being, 13, 1484219.
Behne, K.-E. (1997). The development of “Musikerleben” in adolescence: How and why young people
listen to music. In I. Deliège & J. Sloboda (Eds.), Perception and cognition of music (pp. 143–159). Hove,
UK: Psychology Press.
Bernardi, N. F., Bellemare-Pepin, A., & Peretz, I. (2018). Dancing to “groovy” music enhances the experi-
ence of flow. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1423, 415–426.
Bortz, J., & Schuster, C. (2010). Statistik für Human- und Sozialwissenschaftler (7., vollständig überarbeitete
und erweiterte Auflage) [Statistics for Social Scientists (7th edition)]. Springer-Lehrbuch. Springer-
Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
Loepthien and Leipold 15

Brandtstädter, J. (2017). Adaptive resources of the aging self, assimilative and accommodative modes
of coping. In N. A. Pachana (Ed.), Encyclopedia of geropsychology (pp. 20–27). Singapore: Springer
Nature.
Brandtstädter, J., & Greve, W. (1994). The aging self: Stabilizing and protective processes. Developmental
Review, 14, 52–80.
Brandtstädter, J., & Rothermund, K. (2002). The life-course dynamics of goal pursuit and goal adjust-
ment: A two-process framework. Developmental Review, 22, 117–150.
Burke, M. J., Brief, A. P., George, J. M., Roberson, L., & Webster, J. (1989). Measuring affect at work:
Confirmatory analyses of competing mood structures with conceptual linkage to cortical regulatory
systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1091–1102.
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2007). Personality and music: Can traits explain how people use
music in everyday life? British Journal of Psychology, 98, 175–185.
Chirico, A., Serino, S., Cipresso, P., Gaggioli, A., & Riva, G. (2015). When music “flows.” State and trait
in musical performance, composition and listening: A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 6,
Article 906.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for
the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cohen, S., & Bodner, E. (2019). The relationship between flow and music performance anxiety amongst
professional classical orchestral musicians. Psychology of Music, 47, 420–435.
Croom, A. M. (2015). Music practice and participation for psychological well-being: A review of how
music influences positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishment.
Musicae Scientiae, 19, 44–64.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2009). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York, NY: Harper and Row.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (Ed.). (2014). Flow and the foundations of positive psychology: The collected works of
Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & LeFevre, J. (1989). Optimal experience in work and leisure. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 56, 815–822.
Diaz, F. M. (2011). Mindfulness, attention, and flow during music listening: An empirical investigation.
Psychology of Music, 41, 42–58.
Diedenhofen, B., & Musch, J. (2015). Cocor: A comprehensive solution for the statistical comparison of
correlations. PLoS ONE, 10(4), e0121945.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2002). The broaden and built theory of positive emotions. In M. Csikszentmihalyi & I.
S. Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.), A life worth living: Contributions to positive psychology (pp. 85–103). Oxford,
NY: Oxford University Press.
Fullagar, C. J., Knight, P. A., & Sovern, H. S. (2013). Challenge/skill balance, flow, and performance anxi-
ety. Applied Psychology, 62, 236–259.
Gaggioli, A., Chirico, A., Mazzoni, E., Milani, L., & Riva, G. (2017). Networked Flow in musical bands.
Psychology of Music, 45, 283–297.
Gardikiotis, A., & Baltzis, A. (2012). “Rock music for myself and justice to the world!”: Musical identity,
values, and music preferences. Psychology of Music, 40, 143–163.
Georgi, R., von Bötsch, I., & Fedorov, K. (2016). Singen und subjektives Wohlbefinden: Ein Vergleich von
Musik- und Sportschwerpunktschulen [Singing and subjective well-being: A comparison of schools
sepicalised in sports and music]. Jahrbuch Der Deutschen Gesellschaft Für Musikpsychologie, 26, 34–70.
Getz, L. M., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Roy, M. M., & Devroop, K. (2012). The relationship between affect,
uses of music, and music preferences in a sample of South African adolescents. Psychology of Music,
40, 164–178.
Habe, K., Biasutti, M., & Kajtna, T. (2019). Flow and satisfaction with life in elite musicians and top ath-
letes. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 698.
Hart, E., & Di Blasi, Z. (2015). Combined flow in musical jam sessions: A pilot qualitative study. Psychology
of Music, 43, 275–290.
Heller, K., Bullerjahn, C., & von Georgi, R. (2015). The relationship between personality traits, flow-expe-
rience, and different aspects of practice behavior of amateur vocal students. Frontiers in Psychology,
6, Article 1901.
16 Psychology of Music 00(0)

Huelsman, T. J., Furr, R. M., & Nemanick, R. C. (2016). Measurement of dispositional affect: Construct
validity and convergence with a circumplex model of affect. Educational and Psychological Measurement,
63, 655–673.
Jackson, S. A., & Marsh, H. W. (1996). Development and validation of a scale to measure optimal experi-
ence: The flow state scale. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 18, 17–35.
Lamont, A. (2011). University students’ strong experiences of music. Musicae Scientiae, 15, 229–249.
LeBlanc, A., Jin, Y. C., Obert, M., & Siivola, C. (1997). Effect of audience on music performance anxiety.
Journal of Research in Music Education, 45, 480–496.
Leipold, B., & Loepthien, T. (2009, July 6–9). Music as a resource in middle and older age. Poster presentation
at the International Association for Gerontology & Geriatrics (IAGG). World Congress of Gerontology
and Geriatrics, Paris, France.
Leipold, B., & Loepthien, T. (2015). Music reception and emotional regulation in adolescence and adult-
hood. Musicae Scientiae, 19, 111–128.
Loepthien, T. (2015). Musikhören und der Umgang mit persönlichen Zielen: Der Zusammenhang zwischen
aufmerksam-analytischer Musikrezeption und akkommodativen Prozessen [Listening to music and deal-
ing with personal goals: The relationship between attentive-analytical music listening and accom-
modative processes]. Wissenschaftliche Beiträge aus dem Tectum-Verlag: v.7. Marburg, Germany:
Tectum Verlag.
Loidl, B., & Leipold, B. (2019). Facets of accommodative coping in adulthood. Psychology and Aging, 34,
640–654.
Manzano, O., de Theorell, T., Harmat, L., & Ullén, F. (2010). The psychophysiology of flow during piano
playing. Emotion, 10, 301–311.
Martin, M. M., & Anderson, C. M. (1998). The cognitive flexibility scale: Three validity studies.
Communication Reports, 11, 1–9.
Moneta, G. B. (2012). On the measurement and conceptualization of flow. In S. Engeser (Ed.), Advances in
flow research (pp. 23–50). New York, NY: Springer.
Nakamura, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2002). The concept of flow. In M. Csikszentmihalyi & I. S.
Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.), A life worth living: Contributions to positive psychology (pp. 89–105). Oxford,
NY: Oxford University Press.
North, A. C., Hargreaves, D. J., & Hargreaves, J. J. (2004). Uses of music in everyday life. Music Perception,
22, 41–77.
O’Neill, S. A. (1999). Flow theory and the development of musical performance skills. Bulletin of the
Council for Research in Music Education, 141, 129–134.
Papageorgi, I., Hallam, S., & Welch, G. F. (2007). A conceptual framework for understanding musical
performance anxiety. Research Studies in Music Education, 28, 83–107.
Pates, J., Karageorghis, C. I., Fryer, R., & Maynard, I. (2003). Effects of asynchronous music on flow states
and shooting performance among netball players. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 4, 415–427.
Ruth, N., Spangardt, B., & Schramm, H. (2016). Alternative music playlists on the radio: Flow experience
and appraisal during the reception of music radio programs. Musicae Scientiae, 21, 75–97.
Schaal, N. K., -Bauer, A. K. R., & Müllensiefen, D. (2014). Der Gold-MSI: Replikation und Validierung
eines Fragebogeninstrumentes zur Messung Musikalischer Erfahrenheit anhand einer deutschen
Stichprobe [The Gold-MSI: Replication and validation of an instrument assessing musical expertise
at a German sample]. Musicae Scientiae, 18, 423–447.
Sinnett, S., Jäger, J., Singer, S. M., & Antonini Philippe, R. (2020). Flow states and associated changes in
spatial and temporal processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 381.
Smolej Fritz, B., & Avsec, A. (2007). The experience of flow and subjective well-being of music students.
Psiholoska Obzorja/Horizons of Psychology, 16, 5–17.
Valenzuela, R., Codina, N., & Pestana, J. V. (2018). Self-determination theory applied to flow in conserva-
toire music practice: The roles of perceived autonomy and competence, and autonomous and con-
trolled motivation. Psychology of Music, 46, 33–48.
Wrigley, W. J., & Emmerson, S. B. (2013). The experience of the flow state in live music performance.
Psychology of Music, 41, 292–305.