Journal of Clinical Sport Psychology, 2014, 8, 119-141

http://dx.doi.org/10.1123/jcsp.2014-0018
2014 Human Kinetics, Inc.

www.JCSP-Journal.com
ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Mindfulness and Flow in Elite Athletes

Stuart Cathcart
University of Canberra and South Australian Sports Institute

Matt McGregor
South Australian Sports Institute

Emma Groundwater
South Australian Sports Institute and University of Bath
Mindfulness has been found to be related to improved athletic performance and
propensity to achieve flow states. The relationship between mindfulness and
flow has only recently been examined in elite athletes. To build on this literature,
we administered the Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ) and the
Dispositional Flow Scale to 92 elite athletes. Psychometric analyses supported
the validity of the FFMQ. Males scored higher than females on the FFMQ facet
of Nonjudging of Inner Experience. Athletes from individual and pacing sports
scored higher on the FFMQ facet of Observing than athletes from team-based
and nonpacing sports. Correlations between mindfulness and flow were stronger
in athletes from individual and pacing sports compared with team-based and
nonpacing sports. Mindfulness correlated with different facets of flow in males
compared with females. The results support the use of the five-facet mindfulness
construct in elite athletes and suggest the relationship between mindfulness and
flow possibly may vary by gender and sport type in this population.
Keywords: mindfulness, flow, elite athletes, sport, Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire

The concept of flow has been well described in the literature and demonstrated as a state or disposition associated with improved athletic performance
(Cooper, 1998; Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Jackson & Roberts, 1992). As described
by Jackson and Marsh (1996), flow includes nine dimensions of Challenge-Skill
Balance; Merging of Action and Awareness; Clear Goals; Unambiguous Feedback;
Concentrating on the Task at Hand; Having a Sense of Control; Experiencing a

Stuart Cathcart is with the University of Canberra and the South Australian Sports Institute. Matt
McGregor is with the South Australian Sports Institute. Emma Groundwater is with the South Australian Sports Institute and the University of Bath. Address author correspondence to Stuart Cathcart at
mailto:stuart.cathcart@canberra.edu.au.
119

120Cathcart, McGregor, & Groundwater

Loss of Self-Consciousness; Experiencing a Transformation of Time; and Autotelic

Experience. Hence, flow is characterized by a present-moment focus and complete
absorption in the task at hand, associated with an increase in skill performance.
How to enhance flow in athletes remains somewhat elusive: common techniques
such as arousal regulation, goal setting, and self-talk have had mixed results to date
(Johnson, Hrycaiko, Johnson, & Halas, 2004; Kaufman, Glass, & Arnkoff, 2009;
Kornspan, Overby, & Lerner, 2004). As noted by others (Bernier, Thienot, Codron,
& Fournier, 2009; Salmon, Hanneman, & Harwood, 2010; Schwanhausser, 2009),
one potential method for enhancing flow propensity may be the use of mindfulness
training. Mindfulness as a practice involves fostering and maintaining a nonjudgmental and nonreactive awareness of present moment affective, cognitive, and
somatosensory sensations (Baer, 2003; Kabat-Zinn, 1990; Teasdale et al., 2000).
A close theoretical relationship between the concepts of flow and mindfulness,
particularly the emphasis on present-moment focus, has been noted previously
(Gardner & Moore, 2004; Kaufman et al., 2009; Kee & Wang, 2008; Salmon et al.,
2010). Further, there are well-established interventions for enhancing mindfulness
in general and clinical populations.
A growing body of literature indicates that mindfulness can enhance flow and
performance in sport setting. Studies by Bernier et al. (2009) and Schwanhausser
(2009) both reported increased flow and sport performance following mindfulness
training, and nonrandomized trials by Kabat-Zinn, Beall, and Rippe (1985) and
Wolanin (2005) both reported improved sporting performance and psychological
functioning in athletes receiving mindfulness training. An uncontrolled study by
Kaufman, Glass, and Arnkoff (2009) reported improved confidence and flow, but
no performance improvement, in a community sample of archers and golfers receiving mindfulness training, while an open trial by De Petrillo, Kaufman, Glass, and
Arnkoff (2009) reported decreased worry and perfectionism, but no performance
improvement, in long distance runners receiving mindfulness training. In two
case studies, Gardner and Moore (2004, 2006) reported that athletes who adopted
mindfulness techniques of increasing nonjudgmental awareness and acceptance of
cognitions, feelings, and sensations experienced improved sport performance. In a
recent randomized controlled trial, Aherne, Moran, and Lonsdale (2011) reported
increases in flow subscales of Sense of Control and Clear Goals following mindfulness training in university student athletes.
Results of some mindfulness trials on sport performance and flow states have,
however, been equivocal (Kaufman et al., 2009; Wolanin, 2005), and a 1-year
follow-up study of the Kaufman et al. (2009) and De Petrillo et al. (2009) data found
no change in dispositional flow in athletes receiving very brief mindfulness-based
training (Thompson, Kaufman, De Petrillo, Glass, & Arnkoff, 2011).
A few studies have also examined relationships between measures of mindfulness and measures of flow. Using cluster analysis, Kee and Wang (2008) reported
that university student athletes with the highest flow scores also had the highest
levels of mindfulness, as measured by the Mindfulness-Mindlessness Scale (MMS;
Bodner & Langer, 2001). Small to moderate correlations were also reported between
mindfulness and flow. However, the MMS is an early measure of mindfulness, and
its proposed factor structure has not been replicated in several studies (Haigh, 2006;
Kee, 2006). Indeed, Kee and Wang only used 13 of the original 21 MMS items due
to poor construct validity of the scale in a previous work (Kee, 2006), and even

Mindfulness and Flow in Elite Athletes 121

then, internal consistency of the MMS in the Kee and Wang study was low for
some subscales. Further, Kaufman et al. (2009) found correlations between flow
and overall mindfulness as measured on the Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness
Skills (KIMS; Baer et al., 2004). However, the study only used a small sample of
recreational golfers (n = 21) and archers (n = 11), and relationships between the
particular facets of mindfulness and flow were not examined.
One of the main challenges to understanding and applying mindfulness in sport
is that the construct is in the relatively early stages of development, with theoretical
and operational definitions still under consideration (e.g., Baer, Walsh, & Lykins,
2009; Bishop et al., 2004; Dimidjian & Linehan, 2003). A greater understanding
and refinement of the mindfulness construct as it applies to sport, and its potential
relationship to flow, would be helpful so that mindfulness can be optimally exploited
as a tool for enhancing flow and performance in elite athletes.
One promising approach to refining the mindfulness construct has been presented by Baer and colleagues. Baer, Smith, Hopkins, Krietemeyer, and Toney
(2006) empirically examined the facet structure of mindfulness using five previously developed mindfulness questionnaires. Factor analyses revealed five clear,
interpretable facets of mindfulness:
Observing (Observe)
Describing (Describe)
Acting with Awareness (Act)
Nonjudging of Inner Experience (Nonjudge)
Nonreactivity to Inner Experience (Nonreact)
The individual facets of mindfulness also demonstrated incremental validity in
predicting psychological functioning as measured on the Brief Symptom Inventory
(Derogatis, 1992), and correlated with related constructs of openness to experience,
self-compassion, and emotional intelligence (Baer et al., 2006).
While a considerable amount of research has indicated relationships between
mindfulness and flow (e.g., Aherne, Moran, & Lonsdale, 2011; Bernier et al.,
2009; Gardner & Moore, 2004, 2006; Kaufman et al., 2009; Kee & Wang, 2008;
Salmon et al., 2010), no studies to date have specifically examined the five-facet
mindfulness construct or its potential relationship to flow in athletes. In addition,
the relationship between mindfulness and flow in an elite athlete population has
rarely been examined (e.g., Bernier et al., 2009).
An important question to be further explored is if mindfulness, and its relationship to flow, differ across types of sport. For example, mindfulness could be
beneficial to closed skill sports such as golf or archery through improving fine
motor control during skill acquisition (Salmon et al., 2010) and during competition
(Hatfield & Hillman 2001; Kaufman et al., 2009). In contrast, mindfulness could
improve performance in sports requiring sustained submaximal exertion through
effects on central nervous system control of pacing, and coping with fatigue
(Baron, Moullan, Deruelle, & Noakes, 2009; Tucker, 2009). Each of these effects
may involve different aspects of mindfulness and different relationships to flow.
Similarly, the relationship between mindfulness and flow may be different for individual compared with team sports or may differ by gender (Clark, 2002). However,
against this, Kee and Wang (2008) found gender and sport types (individual vs.

122Cathcart, McGregor, & Groundwater

team) were evenly distributed across the highest and lowest mindfulness clusters.
Given the potential importance of mindfulness and flow in elite sport, further
research is needed on this issue.
The present study therefore examined relationships between facets of mindfulness and facets of flow in an elite athlete population. The aims were to: a) assess
the validity of Baer et al.s (2006) five-facet mindfulness construct; b) replicate
and extend prior research suggesting that mindfulness is related to flow; and c)
elucidate relationships between specific facets of mindfulness and flow in individual vs. team sports, pacing vs. nonpacing sports, and males vs. females. The
main hypothesis was that overall mindfulness and overall flow would be correlated.
Given the conceptual similarity between mindfulness and the flow facet of Focusing
on the Task at Hand, it was hypothesized that this facet of flow would be highly
correlated with mindfulness.

Method
Participants
Participants were 92 athletes from the South Australian Sports Institute (SASI)
and the Australian Institute of Sport (AIS). Athletes from any sport were invited
to participate in the study. Participants included 56 males and 36 females, and the
mean age of the total sample was 18 years (SD = 2.6). The sample contained athletes
from baseball, water polo, swimming, cycling, athletics, netball, mens football
(soccer), kayak, rowing, hockey, basketball, and rifle shooting.

Procedures
The study was approved by the SASI Research Committee. Recruitment involved
the researchers contacting athletes and coaches to provide information on the study
and request volunteer participants. Participant consent was obtained following
explanation of procedures and confirmation that all data would be anonymous and
confidential. Data collection involved administering the battery of questionnaires,
detailed below, to all participants.

Measures
Sociodemographic and sport questionnaire. An in-house questionnaire was

constructed for participants to report sociodemographic, medical, and sports participation information. The questionnaire contained items measuring age, gender,
the sport in which the athlete participated, the number of training hours and training
sessions per week, history of elite sport participation, and illness and injury history.
Illness and injury were defined as any illness or injury resulting in at least 4 weeks
out of the daily training environment of their current sport, since commencing as
an AIS or SASI athlete.

Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ). The Five Facet Mindfulness

Questionnaire (Baer et al., 2006) is a 39-item self-report measure of mindfulness

that consists of five subscales: Observing, Describing, Acting with Awareness,

Mindfulness and Flow in Elite Athletes 123

Nonjudging of Inner Experience, and Nonreactivity to Inner Experience. Items

are rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never or very rarely true) to 5
(very often or always true). The questionnaire has been shown to have good internal
reliability, construct validity, and incremental validity (Baer et al., 2006; Baer et
al., 2008; Cash & Whittingham, 2010).
Dispositional Flow Scale-2 (DFS-2)Physical. The DFS-2 (Physical) is a

36-item questionnaire measuring disposition to experience flow states during

physical activity (Jackson & Eklund, 2004). Responses to flow-related statements
are rated on a scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always). The scale comprises
nine subscales: Challenge-skill balance, action-awareness merging, clear goals,
unambiguous feedback, concentration on the task at hand, sense of control, loss of
self-consciousness, time transformation, and autotelic experience. Reliability and
validity have been extensively demonstrated (Jackson & Eklund, 2002; Jackson &
Marsh, 1996; Jackson, Martin, & Eklund, 2008).

Statistical Analyses
Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS)
v17 (Vesta Services Inc., 2009). All between-groups tests were two-tailed, with
alpha set at .05. Validity of the FFMQ was examined using confirmatory factor
analysis, and Cronbachs alpha for internal consistency. In addition, intercorrelations
between FFMQ facets were conducted to examine if facets represent related but
distinct constructs. We also conducted regression analyses predicting each FFMQ
facet from the other four facets combined. The adjusted R2 indicates the variance
accounted for by the dependents relationship with the other facets, hence revealing
the extent to which facets are nonoverlapping (Baer et al., 2008).
The t tests were conducted to compare genders and sport types on level of
mindfulness and flow. Sport types were calculated as: individual, team, pacing,
and nonpacing. The individual cluster comprised cycling, athletics, rifle shooting,
kayak, and swimming. The team cluster comprised football, basketball, baseball,
water polo, netball, and hockey. The pacing cluster comprised cycling, swimming,
rowing, and kayak. The nonpacing cluster comprised rifle shooting, athletics (there
were no pacing events in the athletics sample), football, basketball, baseball, water
polo, netball, and hockey. Comparisons examined were: individual vs. team, male
vs. female, and pacing vs. nonpacing.
Correlations were conducted to examine relationships between each facet of
mindfulness and flow for each sport type and gender, and to examine relationships
between flow and mindfulness with age, illness and injury history, and years in
elite sport.
Finally, high-flow and low-flow groups were constructed based on N-tiles for
the highest and lowest 3rd of the total sample on flow ranking. The high- and lowflow groups were compared on age, gender, years in elite sport, illness and injury
history, and mindfulness. Logistic regression was used to examine if mindfulness
could predict high- vs. low-flow group membership. Odds ratios were calculated to
determine the increase or decrease in odds of belonging to the high- vs. low-flow
group for a rank increase in each mindfulness facet, controlling for age, gender,
sport type, illness and injury history, and years of involvement in elite sport.

124Cathcart, McGregor, & Groundwater

Results
Validity of the Five-facet Mindfulness Construct
Result of the confirmatory factor analysis indicated a five-factor solution fit the
data well. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test was .73, falling in the good range
for sample adequacy (Kaiser, 1974). Bartletts test of sphericity was confirmed as
significant at p < .05. Stevens (1992) suggested that for this size sample, a factor
loading cut-off of .40 or above should be used as criterion for accepting a factor
as loading meaningfully. Table 1 presents the factor loadings greater than .40 for
each item, and indicates that all item groupings were consistent with the proposed
FFMQ facets, except for items 36, 26, and 20, which are from the Observe subscale,
but loaded higher on the Nonreact subscale.
Cronbachs alpha coefficients indicated that all subscales were internally consistent, falling within the acceptable to excellent ranges of > .7 to > .9 (George
& Mallery, 2003). Coefficients were .73 for Observe, .82 for Describe, .88 for Act,
.92 for Nonjudge, and .74 for Nonreact.
Intercorrelations are presented in Table 2 and show that all FFMQ subscales
were significantly intercorrelated, except for the correlation between Describe and
Nonjudge (r = .22, p > .05), and the correlation between Describe and Nonreact
(r = .18, p > .05).
Results of the regression analyses predicting each FFMQ facet from the other
four facets combined revealed significant models with modest adjusted R2 values
for each dependent variable facet; Describe adjusted R2 = .37, Act adjusted R2 =
.29, Nonjudge adjusted R2 = .32, Nonreact adjusted R2 = .26, Observe adjusted
R2 = .36, indicating that although intercorrelated, a substantial proportion of the
variance in each facet is distinct from the other four (Baer et al., 2008; Cash &
Whittingham, 2010).

Mindfulness and Flow Levels by Gender and Sport Type

Mindfulness and flow scores for gender are presented in Table 3. Males scored
higher than females on the Nonjudge mindfulness scale. There were no other
gender differences on mindfulness or flow measures. Table 4 shows mindfulness
and flow scores by sport type (individual, team, pacing, and nonpacing). Pacing
sport athletes scored higher than nonpacing sport athletes on the Observe facet
of mindfulness. There were no other significant differences between pacing and
nonpacing athletes on levels of mindfulness or flow. Individual sport athletes scored
higher than team sport athletes on the Observe facet of mindfulness. There were no
other significant differences between individual vs. team sport athletes on levels
of mindfulness or flow.

Correlations Between Mindfulness and Flow

Neither total mindfulness nor total flow correlated significantly with age, training
hours, or years in elite sport. Both total mindfulness and total flow correlated
negatively with number of illnesses and number of injuries. Table 5 presents the
correlations between mindfulness and flow, for the total sample, and by gender.

Table 1 Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ) Factor Loadings*

FFMQ Item
FFMQ17
FFMQ30
FFMQ14
FFMQ25
FFMQ3
FFMQ10
FFMQ39
FFMQ35
FFMQ13
FFMQ5
FFMQ38
FFMQ8
FFMQ18
FFMQ34
FFMQ28
FFMQ23
FFMQ22
FFMQ29
FFMQ19
FFMQ21
FFMQ9
FFMQ36
FFMQ26
FFMQ24
FFMQ20
FFMQ4
FFMQ31
FFMQ33
FFMQ37
FFMQ2
FFMQ27
FFMQ7
FFMQ16
FFMQ12
FFMQ32
FFMQ15
FFMQ1
FFMQ6
FFMQ11

1
Nonjudge
.813
.786
.774
.744
.728
.726
.721
.708

FFMQ FACET
2
3
Act Aware
Nonreact

.788
.756
.724
.702
.671
.651
.648
.634
.402

4
Describe

.416
.771
.701
.633
.624
.530
.490
.472
.468
.436
.422
.413

.410

5
Observe

.430
.795
.750
.749
.694
.609
.574
.528
.714
.704
.639
.401

Note. *Factor loadings < .40 have been suppressed.

125

Table 2 Inter-Correlations Between the Five-Facet Mindfulness

Questionnaire Facets
Describe

Act-aware

Nonjudge

Nonreact

.37

.30

.40

.53

.31

.22*

.18*

.46

.32

Observe
Describe
Act-aware
Nonjudge

.27

Note. All p < .05, except for * = p > .05.

Table 3 Mindfulness and Flow in Males and Females

Males
(n = 56)
Mean (SD)

Females
(n = 36)
Mean (SD)

Test value+

Observe

23.4 (5.4)

24.9 (5.0)

1.30

Describe

24.7 (4.7)

25.0 (5.6)

.31

Act-aware

27.3 (5.8)

26.7 (5.3)

.46

Nonjudge

27.6 (7.0)

23.7 (6.6)

2.63*

Nonreact

20.3 (4.1)

20.9 (3.4)

.70

122.8 (13.1)

121.2 (14.8)

.51

Challenge skill balance

3.8 (.56)

3.6 (.52)

1.75

Merging action-awareness

3.5 (.67)

3.4 (.53)

.48

Clear goals

4.1 (.73)

3.9 (.56)

1.37

Unambiguous feedback

3.8 (.66)

3.5 (.71)

1.81

FFMQ facet

Total mindfulness**
DFS-2 factor

Concentration task at hand

3.6 (.62)

3.4 (.60)

1.50

Sense of control

3.8 (.63)

3.6 (.58)

1.46

Loss of self-consciousness

3.0 (.83)

2.9 (.80)

.75

Transformation of time

2.8 (.91)

2.9 (.72)

.65

Autotelic experience

4.2 (.56)

4.1 (.53)

.87

Total flow**

32.7 (3.8)

31.4 (3.5)

.42

Note. FFMQ = Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire; DFS-2 = Dispositional Flow Scale-2 (Physical).
** Sum of scores for FFMQ and DFS-2, respectively. + Independent samples t tests, df = 90.
* p < .05.

126

Table 4 Mindfulness and Flow in Individual vs. Team, Pacing vs. Nonpacing
Sport Athletes
Individual1
(n = 24)
Mean (SD)

Team2
(n = 68)
Mean (SD)

Test
Value+

Pacing3
(n = 20)
Mean (SD)

Observe

26.2 (4.7)

23.3 (5.6)

2.41*

26.3 (4.5)

23.4 (5.2)

2.22*

Describe

26.1 (5.6)

24.2 (4.8)

1.56

26.2 (5.9)

24.3 (4.7)

1.44

Act-aware

27.3 (5.8)

27.9 (6.0)

0.28

27.1 (6.1)

27.0 (5.5)

0.04

Nonjudge

24.7 (7.4)

26.5 (6.9)

1.03

25.5 (7.8)

26.2 (6.9)

0.49

Nonreact

21.5 (4.5)

20.1 (3.5)

1.50

20.9 (4.5)

20.4 (3.7)

0.52

125.6 (16.2)

120.8 (12.7)

0.05

125.4 (17.4)

121.0 (12.5)

1.22

Challenge skill
balance

3.8 (.50)

3.7 (.54)

1.13

3.8 (.47)

3.7 (.56)

0.66

Merging actionawareness

3.5 (.62)

3.4 (6.2)

0.86

3.5 (.51)

3.5 (.64)

0.18

Clear goals

4.1 (.67)

3.9 (.66)

1.10

4.1 (.68)

3.9 (.66)

0.94

Unambiguous
feedback

3.8 (.52)

3.7 (.73)

1.00

3.5 (.49)

3.8 (.73)

1.49

Concentration
task at hand

3.4 (.64)

3.6 (.60)

1.27

3.4 (.67)

3.6 (.60)

1.07

Sense of control

3.6 (.59)

3.8 (.62)

1.01

3.6 (.61)

3.8 (.61)

1.39

Loss of selfconsciousness

3.0 (.84)

3.0 (.79)

0.46

3.0 (.87)

2.9 (.78)

0.10

Transformation
of time

3.0 (.59)

2.8 (.91)

1.21

3.1 (.59)

2.8 (90)

1.21

Autotelic
experience

4.1 (.54)

4.2 (.55)

0.82

4.0 (.52)

4.2 (.56)

1.35

Total flow**

32.4 (3.5)

32.1 (3.8)

0.26

32.0 (3.3)

32.3 (3.8)

0.28

Total
mindfulness**

Nonpacing4
(n = 71)
Test
Mean (SD) Value++

DFS-2 factor

Cycling, athletics, rifle shooting, kayak, swimming. Football, basketball, baseball, water polo, netball,
hockey. 3 Cycling, swimming, rowing, kayak. 4 Rifle shooting, athletics, football, basketball, baseball, water polo,
netball, hockey. + Independent samples t test, Individual vs. Team, df = 89. ++ Independent samples t test, Pacing
vs. Nonpacing, df = 86. *p < .05.
Note.1

127

128Cathcart, McGregor, & Groundwater

For the total sample, total mindfulness (summed FFMQ subscales) was correlated with total flow (summed DFS-2 subscales), and with flow facets of Clear
Goals, Task at Hand, Sense of Control, and Loss of Self-Consciousness. Total
flow correlated with the FFMQ facet of Act, only. Also for the total sample,
FFMQ facets Describe, Act, and Nonjudge were correlated with flow subscales
of Task at Hand, Sense of Control, and Loss of Self-Consciousness, while
FFMQ facets Observe and Nonreact were correlated with the flow subscale of
Transformation of Time.
In males, total mindfulness correlated with flow scales of Task at Hand and
Sense of Control; in females, total mindfulness correlated with Task at Hand, Loss
of Self-Consciousness, and Transformation of Time. In males, total flow did not
correlate significantly with any FFMQ subscales, while in females, total flow correlated with FFMQ subscales of Describe and Act.
Correlations between total flow and total mindfulness were high in pacing
sport athletes (r = .64, p < .01), but lower in nonpacing sport athletes (r = .26,
p < .05; see Table 6). In pacing sports, total flow correlated significantly with
FFMQ subscales of Act and Nonjudge, while there were no significant correlations between total flow and FFMQ facets in nonpacing sport athletes. In pacing
sports, total mindfulness correlated significantly with flow facets of Clear Goals,
Task at Hand, Sense of Control, and Autotelic Experience. In nonpacing sports,
total mindfulness correlated significantly with flow facet of Task at Hand and
Loss of Self-Consciousness.
Correlations between total flow and total mindfulness were high in individual
sport athletes (r = .54, p < .01), but lower in team sport athletes (r = .26, p < .05).
In individual sport athletes, total mindfulness correlated with flow facets of Clear
Goals, Task at Hand, Sense of Control, and Autotelic Experience. In team sport
athletes, total mindfulness correlated significantly with flow facet of Task at Hand
only. In individual sport athletes, total flow correlated significantly with FFMQ
subscales of Observe and Act, while there were no significant correlations between
total flow and FFMQ facets in team sport athletes.

Mindfulness in High-Flow Versus Low-Flow Groups

Table 7 shows FFMQ and sociodemographic data for the high-flow and low-flow
groups (N-tiles for the highest and lowest third of the total sample on total-flow
ranking). The high-flow group had significantly higher levels of total mindfulness
and higher levels on FFMQ subscales of Describe and Act. Groups did not differ
on measures of age, gender, or years in sport (all p > .05).
The logistic regression results are presented in Table 7. Odds ratios (OR)
with 95% confidence intervals (CI) excluding 1.00 are significant at p < .05, and
indicate the change in odds of belonging to the high-flow group for a rank increase
in each FFMQ facet, controlling for age, gender, illness and injury history, and
years in elite sport. The model correctly classified 87% (n = 24) of the high-flow
group, and 68% (n = 19) of the low-flow group, for an overall correct classification of 79% (Chi = 17.24, df = 1, p < .01). FFMQ facets of Observe (OR = 1.26,
95% CI = 1.111.33), and Act (OR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.041.32) were significant
as individual predictors.

129

.13

.02

.33*

.06

.06

Act-aware

Nonjdge

Nonreact

Note. *p < .05; **p < .01.

.13

.37*

Describe

.34*

FEMALES (n = 36)
Total mindfulness

Observe

.07

.28

Nonjudge

Nonreact

.13

.24

Describe

Act-aware

.20

.14

.05

.01

.01

.14

.15

.09

.33*

.03

.16

.26

.20

.02

Observe

.10

Nonjudge

.20

.30**

Act-aware

.05

.33*

.20

Describe

.17

MALES (n = 56)
Total mindfulness

.14

Observe

.18

.24

.16

.09

.07

.23

.05

.10

.03

.09

.09

.00

.21

.01

-.05

.06

.08

.08

.11

Chall Skill
Merge
Balance Action Aware

Nonreact

.33**

TOTAL SAMPLE (N = 92)

Total mindfulness

Total
Flow

.03

.02

.21

.33*

.01

.21

.29*

.03

.17

.08

.13

.25

.20

.06

.20

.16

.09

.23*

Clear
Goals

.18

.14

.04

.16

.07

.05

.14

.20

.11

.17

.01

.25

.04

.10

.10

.14

-.02

.11

Unambig
feedback

.15

.21

.41**

.35*

.01

.40*

.06

.33*

.58**

.28*

.01

.55*

.12

.31**

.54**

.30**

.02

.49**

.04

.12

.27

.24

.07

.26

.07

.23

.28*

.26

.02

.37*

.05

.22*

.31**

.25*

.03

.33**

.26

.23

.40*

.46**

05

.46**

.01

.01

.10

.06

.05

.03

.08

.12

.23*

.24*

-.05

.22*

Task at Sense of Loss Self

hand
Control
Consc

Table 5 Correlations Between Mindfulness and Flow in Males and Females

.34*

.11

.25

.19

.15

.34*

.23

.29*

.16

.20

.29

.12

.27*

-.16

-.03

-.07

.26*

.03

Trans
Time

.05

.05

.21

.11

.20

.14

.29*

.01

.07

.03

.14

.19

.17

.01

.12

.01

.16

.15

Autotelic
Exp

130

.04

.18

Nonjudge

Nonreact

.25

.26

Observe

Describe

Total mindfulness

.64**

.20

Act-aware

(n = 21)

.22

Describe

PACING3

.04

Observe

Total mindfulness

.26*

.20

Nonreact

(n = 68)

.30

Nonjudge

TEAM2

.18

.49*

Act-aware

.37*

Observe

Describe

.54**

INDIVIDUAL1 (n = 24)
Total Mindfulness

Total
Flow

.22

.31

.31

.03

.02

.14

.14

.05

.15

.53*

.18

.02

.23

.43*

.25

.20

.17

.15

.07

.08

.07

.06

.03

.10

.10

.05

.05

.10

.10

.10

Chall Skill Merge Action

Balance
Aware

.10

.18

.50*

.14

.01

.07

.16

.03

.12

.23

.27

.49*

.10

.28

.48*

Clear
Goals

.01

.06

.31

.03

.01

.06

.21

.03

.08

.21

.36

.14

.03

.04

.30

Unambig
feedback

.42*

.20

.61**

.12

.29*

.51*

.31*

.07

.51*

.10

.31

.60**

.42*

.24

.60**

.42*

.26

.71**

.05

.16

.20

.25*

.02

.24

.32

.33

.61**

.37

.26

.67**

Task at Sense of
hand
Control

.22

.05

.15

.18

.13

.19

.24

.10

.25

.17

.11

.28

.18

.05

.14

Loss self
consc

.05

.33

.04

.35*

.17

.08

.10

.19

.02

.13

.10

.10

.11

.39*

.01

Trans
time

.30

.18

.57**

.18

.11

.01

.47

.16

.04

.15

.30

.40*

.21

.25

.49*

Autoelic
exp

(continued)

Table 6 Correlations Between Mindfulness and Flow in Individual, Team, Pacing, and Nonpacing Sport
Athletes

131

.54*

.10

.26*

.10

.21

.18

.01

.22

Nonjudge

Nonreact

(n = 71)
Total mindfulness

Observe

Describe

Act-aware

Nonjudge

Nonreact

.08

.07

.12

.13

.11

.14

.53*

.39

.04

.02

.15

.05

.06

.11

.11

.11

.34

.01

Chall Skill Merge Action

Balance
Aware

.16

.03

.06

.17

.01

.13

.21

.58**

.58**

Clear
Goals

.01

.01

.06

.22

.01

.10

.06

.36

.15

Unambig
feedback

.10

.28*

.48**

.31*

.05

.49**

.08

.45*

.67**

.03

.14

.19

.24*

.01

.24

.25

.19

.64**

Task at Sense of
hand
Control

.21

.09

.20

.23

.07

.26*

.31

.04

.28

Loss self
consc

.34*

.19

.08

.10

.21

.01

.12

.51*

.14

Trans
time

.20

.14

.01

.05

.19

.04

.04

.15

.46*

Autoelic
exp

Cycling, athletics, rifle shooting, kayak, swimming. Football, basketball, baseball, water polo, netball, hockey. Cycling, swimming, rowing, kayak. 4 Rifle
shooting, athletics, football, basketball, baseball, water polo, netball, hockey. * p < .05. **p < .01.

Note.1

NONPACING4

.61**

Total
Flow

Act-aware

Table 6 (continued)

132Cathcart, McGregor, & Groundwater

Table 7 Mindfulness in High-Flow vs. Low-Flow Athletes

High-Flow1
(n = 27)
Mean (SD)

Low-Flow2
(n = 28)
Mean (SD)

Test
Value+

Odds
Ratio

95% CI^

FFMQ#
Observe

25.4 (5.4)

23.2 (4.8)

1.51

1.26

1.111.33*

Describe

26.8 (4.9)

23.7 (5.1)

2.28*

1.13

0.921.37

Act-aware

29.7 (5.3)

25.8 (6.4)

2.42*

1.17

1.041.32*

Nonjudge

26.7 (7.1)

24.3 (7.6)

1.17

1.04

0.871.25

Nonreact

21.0 (3.9)

19.4 (4.6)

1.32

1.13

0.871.45

128.9 (13.4)

116.4 (14.2)

3.22**

Age

18.1 (2.7)

18.5 (3.0)

0.50

0.90

0.641.25

Gender (%Male)

19 (60%)

16 (57%)

1.04

0.51

0.083.08

Years elite sport

3.3 (2.2)

3.9 (3.1)

0.81

0.88

0.601.31

Total mindfulness

Sport (% individual)

8 (29%)

6 (22%)

0.61

1.66

0.124.26

Sport (% pacing)

6 (22%)

5 (23%)

0.23

1.50

0.034.89

Note. 1 Highest third of total sample on DFS-2 Total Flow. 2 Lowest third of total sample on DFS-2 Total Flow.
+ Independent samples t test, all df = 53, except for Gender and Sport = Chi square test, df = 1.
^ 95% Confidence Interval for odds ratio. # Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire. *p < .05. **p < .01.

Discussion
The aims of the current study were to: (a) assess the validity of Baer et al.s (2006)
five-facet mindfulness construct in an athlete population, (b) replicate and extend
prior research suggesting mindfulness is related to flow, and (c) elucidate relationships between specific facets of mindfulness and flow in individual vs. team sports,
pacing vs. nonpacing sports, and males vs. females.

Validity of the Five-facet Mindfulness Construct

The present results support Baer et al.s (2006) five-facet model of mindfulness, and
suggest the FFMQ may be a useful tool for assessing these facets of mindfulness
in elite athletes. The factor analysis revealed five clear factors, with the majority
of items having acceptable factor loadings for each of the proposed FFMQ facets.
The only exception was that three of the Observe subscale items loaded highest
on the Nonreact subscale. Although suppressed in the table, each of the Observe
items did however have loadings of .38 and above on the Observe factor, indicating
that although they were higher on Nonreact, they were close to criterion for being
acceptable loadings on the Observe factor.
Using hierarchical factor analysis in a sample of college students, Baer et al.
(2006) found that while four of the FFMQ facets could be considered elements of
a general mindfulness construct, Observe did not fit this model. However, when
using a sample of regular meditators, Baer et al. (2006) and Baer et al. (2008)

Mindfulness and Flow in Elite Athletes 133

did find that the Observe facet was significant in the hierarchical model, and was
correlated with other FFMQ facets and psychological measures. It was suggested
that the Observe facet may be sensitive to meditation practices altering its relationship with other variables (Baer et al., 2008). Consistent with Baer et al.s (2008)
meditating sample, the present analyses found that Observe was intercorrelated
with the other FFMQ facets, while retaining a substantial proportion of unique
variance. In addition, we found a difference across sport types on the Observe
facet, and Observe was significant in the logistic model as a predictor of high-flow
group membership.
While we did not assess meditation history, most of the athletes in the sample
had received some sport psychology services, including relaxation and attention
control techniques. Speculatively, consistent with Baer et al.s (2008) suggestion
that Observe may be sensitive to meditation practices, Observe may also be sensitive to other psychological techniques (e.g., sport mental skills training), altering its
relationship to other variables, including flow. Indeed, Baer et al. (2006) suggested
that Observe, and its relationship to other psychological variables, may become more
salient as mindfulness develops. Hence, it may be possible that elite athletes, due
to their exposure to sport psychology, may have more developed mindfulness skills
than the general population. Indeed, Kee and Wang (2008) found that university
student athletes who were highest in mindfulness were also highest in reporting use
of traditional sport psychology skills of emotion control, goal setting, and self-talk.

Mindfulness and Flow by Gender and Sport Type

The present analyses found no differences in total mindfulness or total flow levels
between genders or sport types. This is consistent with Kee and Wang (2008)
who, using cluster analysis, found an even distribution of males vs. females, and
individual vs. team sport athletes in high and low mindfulness clusters. Similarly,
Kaufman et al. (2009) found no differences between genders or between golfers and
archers on measures of total flow or total mindfulness. Our results, using a different
measure of mindfulness, confirm and extend the previous findings to suggest no
difference in total flow or total mindfulness levels across gender or sport types of
individual vs. team, and pacing vs. nonpacing, in elite athletes.
On FFMQ subscales however, males had higher levels than females on the
mindfulness facet of Nonjudge, suggesting the male athletes had a higher disposition to not judge their own emotions, cognitions, and bodily sensations, compared
with female athletes. The reason for this finding is unclear at present. Since there
were no gender differences on measures of age, illness or injury, years in sport, or
type of sport participated in, it is unlikely these factors could account for the difference. Baer et al. (2008) found no gender differences on individual FFMQ facets
in a sample of university students. The present finding may, therefore, represent
a unique feature of elite athletes. However, since we did not include a nonathlete
sample, and since no other studies to date have examined the specific FFMQ facets
in athletes, this requires further investigation. Prior research in nonathlete samples
suggests that Nonjudge is the most important of all the FFMQ facets in predicting
psychological well-being, including resistance to anxiety and stress (Baer et al.,
2006; Cash & Whittingham, 2010). Hence, further investigation of gender differences on Non-Judge in athletes may be of particular importance.

134Cathcart, McGregor, & Groundwater

Individual sport athletes scored higher on the FFMQ facet of Observe than did
team sport athletes, and pacing sport athletes scored higher on Observe than did
nonpacing sport athletes. In the present sample, most of the athletes in the pacing
sport sample were also individual sport athletes. Hence, the present result suggests
that individuals in pacing sports may possibly have a higher disposition to observe,
notice, or attend to present moment feelings, thoughts, and sensations compared
with athletes from nonpacing team sports. Why might this be so? In an extension
of Noakess central governor model (Noakes, St Clair Gibson, & Lambert, 2005),
Tucker (2009) proposes that optimal pacing involves integration of somatosensory
afferents with cognitive and emotional processes, to match present-moment perceived exertion with a template of optimal exertion for the required effort duration
(Tucker, 2009). In addition, Baron et al. (2009) suggested that a key part of this
process is the athletes ability to accept and tolerate the negative affect associated
with sustained exertion near physiological limits. Therefore, as noted by others (e.g.,
Salmon et al., 2010), mindfulness-like techniques may be particularly important
in the regulation of sustained exertion, through: (a) enhancing present moment
nonjudgmental awareness of somatosensory, affective, and cognitive stimuli and (b)
enhancing ability to tolerate negative sensations. Further, compared with individual
pacing sports, nonpacing team sports may require more attention to external cues
beyond the individuals control (e.g., teammates, game play), and less attention to
present-moment interoceptive cues (Wulff, 2007). Hence, it may be that individuals
in pacing sports have developed skills in observing present-moment sensations,
due to their particular importance in pacing of sustained exertion. Speculation on
the acquisition of such differences aside, the finding of a difference between sport
types in the Observe facet is broadly consistent with suggestions by Bernier et al.
(2009) and others (De Petrillo et al., 2009; Gardner & Moore, 2004, 2006), that
mindfulness and flow may be of differing importance and have different functions
across sport types.

Correlations Between Mindfulness, Flow,

and Sociodemographic Data
Neither mindfulness nor flow correlated with age, mean training hours, or years in
current sport. This suggests that mindfulness and flow are not skills that develop
purely as a result of age or years in sport. Rather, this result supports the suggestion (e.g., Peterson & Pbert, 1992; Teasdale et al., 2000) that mindfulness is a skill
benefiting from explicit meditative practices. The prior finding that meditating
samples have higher levels of mindfulness than nonmeditating samples (Baer et
al., 2006; Baer et al., 2008) also supports this suggestion. However, Gooding and
Gardner (2009) found that mindfulness and competitive experience shared considerable variance, and maintained unique variance as well, in predicting basketball free
throw performance, which they interpreted as suggesting that mindfulness may, to
some degree, increase with competitive experience (Gooding & Gardner 2009). The
difference in experience between the two samples may account for the difference
in findings between our data and Gooding and Gardners. For example, Gooding
and Gardner used a USA sample of NCAA Division I basketball athletes, representing a closed skill sport (as the athletes were assessed on free throw shooting),
whereas we used a large sample of elite Australian athletes all from open skill sports.

Mindfulness and Flow in Elite Athletes 135

Future research could explore the potential importance, and particular elements,
of athlete sporting experience in influencing mindfulness and flow. A potentially
important finding in the present data is that both total mindfulness and total flow
were negatively correlated with number of illnesses and number of injuries. This
suggests that the more injuries or illnesses an athlete has, the lower their propensity
to mindfulness and flow are. We are not aware of any other studies reporting this
result, and the present methodology precludes identifying any causal direction or
significance. However, potentially, a history of injury could reduce mindfulness or
flow propensity by increasing attention to potential injury in the daily training or
competition environment. Alternatively, a lower level of mindfulness or flow could
increase risk of injury due to poorer awareness of present-moment somatosensory
conditions. Bernier et al. (2009) and others (Salmon et al., 2010) have noted that
mindfulness can influence technical and tactical decisions. Potentially, such decisions may influence risk of and recovery from injury or illness. Alternatively, a
higher incidence of illness or injury and lower mindfulness and flow, could co-occur
as a result of other common factors not measured in the present data. Given the
potential importance of a relationship between mindfulness, flow, and injury/illness
in elite athletes, further research should be conducted to examine these possibilities.
Consistent with previous work (Kaufman et al., 2009; Kee & Wang, 2008),
we found total mindfulness was correlated with total flow, and this persisted when
examined by gender and sport type. Using cluster analysis, Kee and Wang (2008)
found athletes highest in mindfulness also had the highest flow scores. Extending this, our findings indicate that there is a positive linear relationship between
mindfulness and flow, across the entire sample. This is consistent with Kaufman
et al. (2009), who found a strong positive correlation between overall mindfulness
on the KIMS and total flow in a sample of archers and golfers.
As hypothesized, and consistent with previous research (Aherne et al., 2011;
Chavez, 2008; Swann, Keegan, Piggott, & Crust, 2012), the flow facet of Focusing
on the Task at Hand appears particularly important in the relationship with mindfulness, as this was correlated with both total mindfulness and several of the FFMQ
facets, particularly Describe, Act, and Nonjudge. Such a result is not surprising
given that a key component of mindfulness is present-moment awareness (KabatZinn, 1990; Peterson & Pbert, 1992), which is also likely to be a skill required to
focus on the task at hand. Potentially then, enhancing skills of describing, acting
with awareness, and nonjudging could enhance ability to focus on the task at hand,
or vice versa.

Correlations Between Mindfulness and Flow by Gender

While the strength of correlations between total mindfulness and total flow were
similar across genders, we found males and females differed in their pattern of correlations between flow and mindfulness facets. Particularly, there were no significant
correlations between total flow and individual FFMQ subscales in males, while
total flow correlated significantly with Describe and Act in females. It may be that
these facets of mindfulness are particularly important in the relationship with flow
in females, whereas total flow in males may be related more to overall mindfulness.
There was a marked gender difference in the relationship between mindfulness
and the flow facet of Loss of Self-Consciousness. These correlations were near zero

136Cathcart, McGregor, & Groundwater

in males, but notably higher for all but the Observe FFMQ facets in females, particularly facets of Describe, and Act. Ryan and Brown (2003) suggested that more
mindful individuals have higher self-esteem and are less affected by introjections.
Similarly, Kee and Wang (2008) and others (Salmon et al., 2010; Swann, Keegan,
Piggott, & Crust, 2012) have suggested that the inhibition of cognition associated
with mindfulness may enhance an unselfconscious focus on task at hand. Our data
support these suggestions for female athletes, but not males.
A gender difference was also found on the flow facet of Sense of Control,
which correlated significantly with total mindfulness and FFMQ facet of Act in
males, but not females. Acting with awareness may increase the sense of control
during athletic performance (Gardner & Moore, 2004; Salmon et al., 2010), with
the present finding suggesting this relationship could be stronger in males than
females. However, the magnitude of correlations between Sense of Control and
Act was similar in males and females. Hence, the lack of significance in females
may be due to the different sample sizes. Further research is required to replicate
and elucidate these gender differences.

Correlations Between Mindfulness and Flow by Sport Type

We found a clear pattern of higher correlations between mindfulness and flow in
individual and pacing sports compared with team-based and nonpacing sports.
This was found for correlations between total mindfulness and total flow and for
correlations between facets of mindfulness and facets of flow.
Significant correlations were found in all sport types between total mindfulness and total flow, and between flow facets of Focusing on the Task at Hand and
FFMQ facets of Describe, Act, and Nonjudge. However, these correlations were
notably higher in individual compared with team sports, and pacing compared with
nonpacing sports. Notably, correlations between total flow and total mindfulness
in our sample of individual and pacing sport (IP) athletes were of a comparable
(although smaller) magnitude to those of Kaufman et al.s (2009) sample, but were
in the order of twice as strong as the correlations between mindfulness and flow in
the team and nonpacing (TNP) sport athletes.
In addition, IP sport athletes had several significant correlations that were not
observed in TNP sport athletes. For example, there were no significant correlations
between total flow and FFMQ subscales in TNP athletes, while in IP athletes, total
flow correlated significantly with Act and Nonjudge. Similarly, total mindfulness
correlated significantly with most flow subscales in IP athletes, but only with Task
at Hand in team-based athletes, and Task at Hand and Loss of Self-Consciousness
in nonpacing sport athletes. Further, Autotelic Experience, Clear Goals, and Challenge Skill Balance all correlated with at least one FFMQ facet in IP athletes, but
not in TNP athletes.
Combined with our finding of generally no difference in mean levels of flow
or mindfulness between sport types, these correlation results suggest that although
athletes from different sports generally do not differ on levels of mindfulness or flow,
they do differ on the relationship between these constructs. What can account for this
finding? As noted earlier, there may be a greater reliance on internal compared with
external attentional focus in IP compared with TNP sports (Chavez, 2008; Salmon
et al., 2010; Tucker, 2009; Wulff, 2007). Since mindfulness involves a degree of

Mindfulness and Flow in Elite Athletes 137

internal focus (e.g., observing, nonjudging, nonreacting), it may be that mindfulness has a greater, or more relevant, influence on flow in IP athletes, while flow is
more (or additionally) affected by other external factors in TNP athletes (e.g., team
dynamics). Hence, the different pattern of correlations we found may not simply
reflect a stronger relationship between flow and mindfulness in IP athletes, but may
possibly be due also to a qualitatively different relationship between mindfulness
and flow in IP compared with TNP sports. If this were true, then it may manifest as
a higher correlation between mindfulness and flow, and a different pattern of correlations between mindfulness and flow facets in IP compared with TNP athletes, as
found in the present data. While speculative and requiring additional investigation,
this proposition is consistent with Swann et al. (2012), who identified that different
factors may influence propensity to achieve flow across different sports, and with
work by Chavez (2008), who found athletes from individual sports compared with
team sports reported a greater role for present-moment focus and reduced cognitive
analysis of performance in achieving flow states.

Mindfulness in High-Flow Versus Low-Flow Groups

To replicate and extend prior work on high- and low-flow groups (e.g., Kee & Wang,
2008), we combined genders and sport types to calculate high- and low-flow groups
based on the highest and lowest third of the sample on total flow scores. High-flow
athletes had significantly higher scores on total mindfulness and FFMQ facets of
Describe and Act with Awareness; however, they did not differ on sociodemographic,
sport type, or sport history data. Consistent with Kee and Wang (2008), this suggests that not only are flow and mindfulness correlated in elite athletes, but that
elite athletes with the highest flow propensity also have the highest disposition to
mindfulness, particularly, the ability to describe present-moment sensations and the
ability to purposely act with awareness. Importantly, we also found that Describe
and Act were significant predictors in the logistic model. This suggests that the
odds of an athlete being in the highest flow group significantly increase as the
ability to Describe and Act increase, even when accounting for age, gender, years
in sport, and sport type. Hence, despite the differences between genders and sport
types in flow and mindfulness correlations, mindfulness appears to predict flow
across all elite athletes. Although causal relationships cannot be determined in this
data, the result supports the suggestion that propensity to achieve flow states may
be enhanced by increasing mindfulness (Schwanhausser, 2009).

Are the Constructs of Mindfulness and Flow Confounded?

Overall, the present results are consistent with previous research indicating an
empirical relationship between mindfulness and flow. This is not surprising given
the widely noted close theoretical relationship between the two constructs. However,
given that both mindfulness and flow are somewhat elusive constructs, one potential
explanation for the observed relationships is that measures of flow and mindfulness are in fact assessing the same construct. For example, as noted by others (e.g.,
Gardner & Moore, 2004, 2006; Kaufman et al., 2009; Kee & Wang, 2008; Salmon et
al., 2010), mindfulness and flow both have a central component of present-moment
focus and immersion in the task at hand. Kee and Wang (2008) have suggested that

138Cathcart, McGregor, & Groundwater

flow components of Focus on Goals, Concentration, Sense of Control, and Loss

of Self-Consciousness are closely related to attentional self-regulation, which is
one of two components in Bishop et al.s (2004) conceptualization of mindfulness.
Similarly, Brown and Ryan (2003) have suggested that highly mindful individuals
have increased self-esteem and are less affected by introjections, which Kee and
Wang (2008) have suggested may account for why highly mindful athletes also
have a stronger propensity for the flow dimension of Loss of Self-Consciousness.
Indeed, we presently found strong correlations between mindfulness and Loss of
Self-Consciousness, in females at least.
These close relationships noted, however, there are several reasons why mindfulness and flow may be considered separate constructs. Empirically, there remains
considerable variance unexplained in the relationships typically observed between
measures of flow and mindfulness, indicating that while related, these two measures
may be assessing different latent constructs. Conceptually, mindfulness and flow
differ in their intentional agency. In this regard, Bishop et al. (2004) suggested that
while flow and mindfulness share some similar features (e.g., present-moment
attention), the following are features of mindfulness that are not features of flow:
(a) an orientation to, and openness and acceptance of, experience, cultivated through
mindful meditation; (b) an explicit intention to observe the transient nature and
subjectivity (as opposed to validity) of experience (including feelings, cognitions,
sensations); and (c) a focus on the internal experience. Further, Bishop et al. suggested that flow is better considered as a potential outcome of mindfulness, rather
than a comparable process. In addition, Dane (2011) has suggested that while both
states could be considered high in temporal orientation (present-moment focus),
attentional breadth in mindful states is wide (e.g., observing all experiences), whereas
attentional focus in flow states in narrower (e.g., focusing only on the task at hand).
The above issues noted, given the close empirical and theoretical relationship
between mindfulness and flow, further research is needed to clarify the similarities
and differences between the two constructs.

Limitations
A number of limitations in the current study should be considered. Firstly, the
correlational design precludes any causal inference on the relationship between
mindfulness and flow. Although our sample size was substantial compared with most
previous research in the area, it was still quite small for the number of analyses conducted, which also resulted in the factor analysis being underpowered. In addition,
sample sizes for each sport were too small to allow reliable analyses by each sport
type (e.g., cycling only). Different results may have been obtained if sports were
grouped differently for analyses. Similarly, the difference in sample sizes between
individual-pacing compared with team-based nonpacing groups may have inflated
the contribution of individual variability to the results of the individual and pacing
clusters. However, the comparison of these clusters was considered appropriate for
the present exploratory study, given the literature suggesting possible differences
in the role of mindfulness and flow in these sport types. Further, since the sample
size was substantial compared with much prior research in the area of mindfulness
and flow in sport, we believe the present methods are satisfactory for this initial
research into the feasibility of using the FFMQ in sport psychology research.

Mindfulness and Flow in Elite Athletes 139

Conclusion
The present results support the validity of the five-facet mindfulness construct for
examining mindfulness in elite athletes, and extend previous research suggesting that
mindfulness and flow are related in athlete populations, in this case elite athletes.
In addition, the results indicate that while gender and sport types generally do not
differ in the propensity for mindfulness and flow, they do differ on the relationship
between these constructs. Particularly, the relationship between mindfulness and
flow may possibly be stronger in individual-pacing sports compared with teambased nonpacing sports, and mindfulness may possibly be related to different facets
of flow in males compared with females. Given previous research indicating that
mindfulness is useful for enhancing athletic performance and well-being in elite
athletes, further research should be conducted to replicate and extend the present
exploratory results.

References
Aherne, C., Moran, A., & Lonsdale, C. (2011). The effect of mindfulness training on athletes
flow: An initial investigation. The Sport Psychologist, 25, 177189.
Baer, R.A. (2003). Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: A conceptual and empirical review. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10, 125143. doi:10.1093/
clipsy.bpg015
Baer, R.A., Smith, G.T., & Allen, K.B. (2004). Assessment of mindfulness by self-report:
The Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills. Assessment, 11, 191206. PubMed
doi:10.1177/1073191104268029
Baer, R.A., Smith, G.T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006). Using self-report
assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13(1), 2745.
PubMed doi:10.1177/1073191105283504
Baer, R.A., Smith, G., Lykins, E.L.B., Button, D., Krietemeyer, J., Sauer, S., . . . Williams, J. (2008). Construct validity of the five facet mindfulness questionnaire in
meditating and non-meditating samples. Assessment, 15(3), 329342. PubMed
doi:10.1177/1073191107313003
Baer, R.A., Walsh, E., & Lykins, E.L.B. (2009). Assessment of mindfulness. In F. Didonna
(Ed.), Clinical handbook of mindfulness (pp. 153170). New York: Springer.
Baron, B., Moullan, F., Deruelle, F., & Noakes, T.D. (2009). The role of emotions on pacing
strategies and performance in middle and long duration sport events. British Journal
of Sports Medicine, 45, 511517.
Bernier, M., Thienot, E., Codron, R., & Fournier, J. (2009). Mindfulness and acceptance
approaches in sport performance. Journal of Clinical Sports Psychology, 4, 320333.
Bishop, S.R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L., Anderson, N.C., Carmody, J., & Devins, G.
(2004). Mindfulness: A proposed operational definition. Clinical Psychology: Science
and Practice, 11, 230241. doi:10.1093/clipsy.bph077
Bodner, T., & Langer, E. (2001, June). Individual differences in mindfulness: The Langer
Mindfulness Scale. Poster session presented at the annual meeting of the American
Psychological Society, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Brown, K.W., & Ryan, R.M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its
role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84,
822848. PubMed doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822
Cash, M., & Whittingham, K. (2010). What facets of mindfulness contribute to psychological
well-being and depressive, anxious, and stress-related symptomatology? Mindfulness,
1, 177182. doi:10.1007/s12671-010-0023-4

140Cathcart, McGregor, & Groundwater

Chavez, E. (2008). Flow in sport: A study of college athletes. Imagination, Cognition and
Personality, 28, 6991. doi:10.2190/IC.28.1.f
Clark, S.R. (2002). The impact of self-regulated attention control on the amount of time spent
in flow. Dissertation Abstracts International, 63 (05), p. 2615B (UMI no. 3055205).
Cooper, A. (1998). Playing in the zone: Exploring the spiritual dimensions of sports. Boston:
Shambhala Publications, Inc.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York:
Harper & Row.
Dane, E. (2011). Paying attention to mindfulness and its effects on task performance in the
workplace. Journal of Management, 37, 9971018. doi:10.1177/0149206310367948
De Petrillo, L., Kaufman, K., Glass, C., & Arnkoff, D. (2009). Mindfulness for long-distance
runners: An open trial using Mindful Sport Performance Enhancement (MSPE). Journal
of Clinical Sports Psychology, 3, 357376.
Derogatis, L.R. (1992). The Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI): Administration, scoring &
procedures manual-II. Baltimore, MD: Clinical Psychometric Research.
Dimidjian, S., & Linehan, M.M. (2003). Defining an agenda for future research on the clinical application of mindfulness practice. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10,
166171. doi:10.1093/clipsy.bpg019
Gardner, F.L., & Moore, Z.E. (2004). A MindfulnessAcceptanceCommitment (MAC)
based approach to performance enhancement: Theoretical considerations. Behavior
Therapy, 35, 707723. doi:10.1016/S0005-7894(04)80016-9
Gardner, F.L., & Moore, Z.E. (2006). Clinical sport psychology. Champaign, IL: Human
Kinetics.
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. 11.0 update (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Gooding, A., & Gardner, F.L. (2009). An investigation of the relationship between mindfulness, preshot routine, and basketball free throw percentage. Journal of Clinical Sports
Psychology, 3, 303319.
Haigh, E.A.P. (2006). Examination of the factor structure of the Langer Mindfulness/Mindlessness Scale. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Kent State University.
Hatfield, B.D., & Hillman, C.H. (2001). The psychophysiology of sport: A mechanistic
understanding of the psychology of superior performance. In R.N. Singer, H. Hausenblas, & C. Janelle (Eds.), Handbook of Sport Psychology (2nd ed., pp. 362388). New
York: John Wiley & Sons.
Jackson, S.A., & Eklund, R.C. (2002). Assessing flow in physical activity: The Flow State
Scale-2 and Dispositional Flow Scale-2. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 24,
133150.
Jackson, S.A., & Eklund, R.C. (2004). The Flow Scale manual. Morgantown, WV: Fitness
Information Technology.
Jackson, S.A., & Marsh, H.W. (1996). Development and validation of a scale to measure
optimal experience: The Flow State Scale. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology,
18, 1735.
Jackson, S.A., Martin, A., & Eklund, R. (2008). Long and short measures of flow: The
construct validity of the FSS-2, DFS-2, and New Brief Counterparts. Journal of Sport
& Exercise Psychology, 30, 561587. PubMed
Jackson, S.A., & Roberts, G.C. (1992). Positive performance states of athletes: Toward a
conceptual understanding of peak performance. The Sport Psychologist, 6, 156171.
Johnson, J.J.M., Hrycaiko, D.W., Johnson, G.V., & Halas, J.M. (2004). Self-talk and female
youth soccer performance. The Sport Psychologist, 18, 4459.
Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full catastrophe living. New York: Delta.
Kabat-Zinn, J., Beall, B., & Rippe, J. (1985, April). A systematic mental training program based
on mindfulness meditation to optimize performance in collegiate and Olympic rowers.
Poster presented at the World Congress in Sport Psychology, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Mindfulness and Flow in Elite Athletes 141

Kabat-Zinn, J. Massion, A.O., Kristeller, J., Peterson, L.G., Fletcher, K.E., Pbert, L., Lenderking, W.R., & Santorelli, S.F. (1992). Effectiveness of a meditation-based stress
reduction program in the treatment of anxiety disorders. The American Journal of
Psychiatry,149, 936943. PubMed
Kaiser, H.F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 3136. doi:10.1007/
BF02291575
Kaufman, K.A., Glass, C.R., & Arnkoff, D.B. (2009). Evaluation of mindful sport performance enhancement (MSPE): A new approach to promote flow in athletes. Journal of
Clinical Sports Psychology, 4, 334356.
Kee, Y.H. (2006). Relationships between mindfulness and propensity of individual to experience flow. Unpublished masters thesis, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
Kee, Y.H., & Wang, C.K.J. (2008). Relationships between mindfulness, flow dispositions and
mental skills adoption: A cluster analytic approach. Psychology of Sport and Exercise,
9, 393411. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2007.07.001
Kornspan, A.S., Overby, L.Y., & Lerner, B.S. (2004). Analysis and performance of preperformance imagery and other strategies on a golf putting task. Journal of Mental
Imagery, 28, 5974.
Noakes, T.D., St Clair Gibson, A., & Lambert, E.V. (2005). From catastrophe to complexity: a novel model of integrative central neural regulation of effort and fatigue during
exercise in humans: Summary and conclusions. British Journal of Sports Medicine,
39, 120124. PubMed doi:10.1136/bjsm.2003.010330
Peterson, L.G., & Pbert, L. (1992). Effectiveness of a meditation-based stress reduction
program in the treatment of anxiety disorders. The American Journal of Psychiatry,
149, 936943. PubMed
Ryan, R.M., & Brown, K.W. (2003). Why we dont need self-esteem: On fundamental needs,
contingent love, and mindfulness. Psychological Inquiry, 14, 7176.
Salmon, P., Hanneman, S., & Harwood, B. (2010). Associative/dissociative cognitive strategies in sustained physical activity: Literature review and proposal for a mindfulnessbased conceptual model. The Sport Psychologist, 24, 127156.
Schwanhausser, L. (2009). Application of the mindfulness-acceptance-commitment (MAC)
protocol with an adolescent springboard diver. Journal of Clinical Sports Psychology,
4, 377395.
SPSS Inc. (2009) Statistical package for the social sciences, Release 17.0, Vesta Services
Inc, USA.
Stevens, J. (1992). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. New Jersey: Erlbaum.
Swann, C., Keegan, R.J., Piggott, D.J., & Crust, L. (2012). A systematic review of the
experience, occurrence, and controllability of flow states in elite sport. Psychology of
Sport and Exercise, 13, 807819. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2012.05.006
Teasdale, J.D., Segal, Z.V., Williams, J.M.G., Ridgeway, V.A., Soulsby, J.M., & Lau, M.A.
(2000). Prevention of relapse/recurrence in major depression by mindfulness-based
cognitive therapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 615623. PubMed
doi:10.1037/0022-006X.68.4.615
Thompson, R.W., Kaufman, K.A., De Petrillo, L.A., Glass, C.R., & Arnkoff, D.B. (2011).
One year follow-up of mindful sport performance enhancement (MSPE) with archers,
golfers, and runners. Journal of Clinical Sports Psychology, 5(2), 99116.
Tucker, R. (2009). The anticipatory regulation of performance: The physiological basis
for pacing strategies and the development of a perception-based model of exercise
performance. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 43, 392400. PubMed doi:10.1136/
bjsm.2008.050799
Wolanin, A.T. (2005). Mindfulness-acceptance-commitment (MAC) based performance
enhancement for Division I collegiate athletes: A preliminary investigation. Dissertation Abstracts International, 65(7-B), 3735.
Wulff, G. (2007). Attention and motor skill learning. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Copyright of Journal of Clinical Sport Psychology is the property of Human Kinetics

Publishers, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a
listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.