The purpose of this paper is to review three decades of the literature on flow measurement and propose issues to advance research on the measurement of social flow at work.,In a systematic literature review, the authors analyzed 143 articles published in the first three decades (1983–2013) of scholarly publications on flow measurement, of which 84 articles used scales to measure flow and 16 articles used scales to measure flow at work.,The main findings are: flow is frequently measured in association with other constructs or by means of proxies; flow measurement is highly dependent on a study’s purposes and context; flow is mostly studied at the level of the individual and, when studied beyond the individual, the measurement of flow in groups is simplified as an aggregation of individual-level measures; and social flow at work is an underresearched construct that nevertheless impacts organizations in important ways, thus deserving a specific research agenda.,The first limitation refers to the databases included in the review. There is always the possibility that important works were ignored. Another limitation is that the coding procedure was highly dependent on the authors’ discretion, as it did not include independent coding and formal assessment of agreement among coders. But the greatest limitation may refer to our very perspectives on flow, flow measurement and social flow at work, as they are highly attached to current models instead of seeing the issues with different lenses. This limitation is also present in the literature.,Reviewing three decades of scholarly publications on how flow has been measured contributes to organizations in their planning for person-job fit. The measurement of flow can reveal if and when flow correlates with personal characteristics and organizational events, thus serving to inform initiatives on personnel development, acculturation and job design. However, considering that flow as a social phenomenon has been conceived in superficial terms, that a vast number of empirical studies were developed with non-professional subjects, and that flow measurement involves significant adaptations to each situation, organizations are thus advised to be careful in adopting extant instruments.,This study provides a rich account on how flow measurement has been addressed in the scholarly literature, and it calls attention to research opportunities on social flow at work.

中文翻译：

---

工作中的社会流量的测量：对文献的30年系统回顾

本文的目的是回顾三十年来有关流量测量的文献，并提出一些问题以推动对工作中社会流量的测量的研究。在系统的文献综述中，作者分析了前三十年中发表的143篇文章（ 1983年至2013年）有关流量测量的学术出版物，其中84篇文章使用标尺来测量流量，16篇文章使用标尺来测量工作中的流量。主要发现是：经常结合其他结构或通过测量来测量流量。代理 流量测量高度依赖于研究的目的和环境；流量主要在个体层面上进行研究，而在个体之外进行研究时，分组流量的度量被简化为个体层面度量的集合；而工作中的社会流动是一个研究不足的结构，但是它以重要的方式影响组织，因此值得一个特定的研究议程。第一个限制是指评价中包括的数据库。总是有可能忽略重要的作品。另一个限制是编码程序高度依赖作者的判断力，因为它不包括独立编码和编码人员之间对协议的正式评估。但是最大的局限性可能是我们对工作中的流量，流量测量和社会流量的看法，因为它们与当前模型紧密相关，而不是用不同的视角看待问题。该限制也存在于文献中。回顾三十年来有关如何测量流量的学术出版物，有助于组织制定适合个人工作的计划。流程的度量可以揭示流程是否以及何时与个人特征和组织事件相关，从而有助于就人员发展，适应能力和工作设计提出建议。但是，考虑到流量是一种社会现象，是从表面上来考虑的，针对非专业的研究对象开展了大量的实证研究，并且流量测量涉及对每种情况的重大适应，因此建议组织在使用时要谨慎本研究为学术文献中流量测量的解决方法提供了丰富的解释，