Psychology 2012. Vol.3, No.12, 1059-1066 Published Online December 2012 in SciRes (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/psych) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/psych.2012.312157 Copyright © 2012 SciRes. 1059 Optimal Performance in Means-Ends Activities: On the Emergence of Self-Other/World Differentiation in Infancy Despina Stamatopoulou University of Crete, Department of Philosophy and Social Studies, Rethymno, Greece. Email: stamatop@phl.uoc.gr Received October 1 st , 2012; revised October 31 st , 2012; accepted November 30 th , 2012 We know little about the role of background positive affectivity and flow experiences in early develop- ment concerning means-ends activities and their possible contribution regarding symbolic functioning and the consolidation of the self as agent. The theoretical argument presented here is that a deeper apprecia- tion of the benefits and challenges of optimal experience may help built a more unified account of optimal functioning in development. That is, the paradox of control in flow, and its relational/mirroring structure, wherein the demands of the structure (means) are entities in themselves (ends), mark possibilities for the temporal organization of experience when fine motor tuning and gross motor intention overlap. When means-focused action/temporal regulation (I) and ends-focused action (Me) become synchronized in an integrated embodied system, the system shifts experience to the experiential gear. Means-ends dynamics, then, via mirroring processes organized in turn-taking flow structures between formative action (means) and production, push the child’s primary reactive space to be converted into the child’s interactive expe- riential space and in turn mapped on and gradually transformed to the “secondary”, communicative/ex- pressive space, which also controls its manifestation, initiating in line conscious control and self-referen- tial intentionality. Keywords: “Means-Ends” Dynamics; Optimal Experience; Background Positive Affectivity; Self-Referential Intentionality; Symbol Formation Introduction Csikszentmihalyi (1975) introduced the concept of flow to designate the subjective experience that accompanies perform- ance in a situation where challenges are matched with the per- son’s skills. Flow is an optimal psychological state described at length by Csikszentmihalyi (e.g., 1975, 1988, 1993) and sub- stantiated in a variety of settings (see Csikszentmihalyi, 1997; Jackson, 1992; Kerr, 1997). The original account of flow has proven remarkably robust confirmed through studies of art and science (Chiskentmihalyi, 1998). Throughout 80s and 90s the concept was embraced by researchers studying optimal experi- ence (e.g., sports and leisure) (Jackson, 1992) or peak experi- ence (e.g., aesthetic experience) (Chiskentmihalyi & Robinson, 1990; Stamatopoulou, 2004) and more recently by researchers working in contexts fostering positive experience. Flow re- search and theory had their origin in a desire to understand this phenomenon of intrinsically motivated or autotelic experience which is intrinsically rewarding (activity rewarding in and of itself quite apart from any extrinsic goals). Chiskentmihalyi, adopting an experiential perspective, inves- tigated the nature and conditions of flow experience forming a picture of the characteristic qualities of optimal experience. When in flow, a person becomes totally involved being ab- sorbed in the activity and undergoes a number of positive ex- periences, including freedom from self-consciousness/loss of ego, great enjoyments of the process, clarity of goals and knowledge of performance, complete concentration, feelings of control, and a sense of being totally in tune with the perform- ance. Theoretically, flow as an optimal mental state, would be expected to be associated with optimal performance as well as providing an optimal experience. More specifically, at the indi- vidual level optimal experience has to be contextualized in the theoretical frame of daily psychological selection (Csikszent- mihalyi & Massimini, 1985). Psychological selection results from the individual’s differential investment of attention and resources on the information available in their environment which also controls its manifestation. Owing to its positive psychological features, optimal experi- ence has been sometimes misunderstood as a state which auto- matically brings about well-being and development. Several studies have disconfirmed this assumption, showing that the outcomes of optimal experience are not automatically positive (Delle Fave, 2007). Rather, they vary according to the features of the associated activities; to the developmental level of skills and their potential goodness of fit, and to the value system of the cultural environment (see for an extended review see: Delle Fave, 2007). A large number of studies conducted in the last twenty years shows that flow is a multifaceted experiential state, in which cognitive, motivational and emotional components coexist in a coherent and complex reciprocal integration (Della Fave, 2007; Delle Fave & Massimini, 2005; Delle Fave, Bassi, & Massimini, 2008). Thus, we cannot assume a direct relation between flow, positive experience and development. However, what do we know about the relationship between optimal experience, symbol formation, meaning making, goal setting and pursuit? Within the framework of psychological selection, and taking into account the dynamic features of the meaning-making process, optimal experience can be considered both an antecedent and an outcome (Delle Fave , 2007). Due to