Cargando…

Classifying individual differences in interoception: Implications for the measurement of interoceptive awareness

It has been suggested that individual differences in interoception (the perception of the body’s internal state) can be divided into three distinct dimensions: interoceptive accuracy (performance on objective tests of interoceptive accuracy), interoceptive sensibility (self-reported beliefs concerni...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Murphy, Jennifer, Catmur, Caroline, Bird, Geoffrey
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6797703/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31270764
http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01632-7
_version_ 1783459888282730496
author Murphy, Jennifer
Catmur, Caroline
Bird, Geoffrey
author_facet Murphy, Jennifer
Catmur, Caroline
Bird, Geoffrey
author_sort Murphy, Jennifer
collection PubMed
description It has been suggested that individual differences in interoception (the perception of the body’s internal state) can be divided into three distinct dimensions: interoceptive accuracy (performance on objective tests of interoceptive accuracy), interoceptive sensibility (self-reported beliefs concerning one’s own interoception) and interoceptive awareness (a metacognitive measure indexed by the correspondence between interoceptive accuracy and interoceptive sensibility). Research conducted under this model underscores the importance of interoceptive awareness for a variety of disorder-specific and transdiagnostic symptoms. However, the clinical importance of interoceptive awareness means that this aspect of interoception warrants further scrutiny, and such scrutiny suggests that revision of the three-dimensional model of interoception is necessary. In this theoretical paper, we outline such a revision, highlighting a need to distinguish not only how interoception is measured (objective measures vs. self-report), but also what is measured (accuracy vs. attention). The model refines how individual differences in interoception are categorised, with important consequences for the measurement of interoceptive awareness. Such a revision may help researchers to identify the strengths and weaknesses in interoception observed across clinical conditions, and to isolate clinically relevant individual differences.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6797703
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67977032019-11-01 Classifying individual differences in interoception: Implications for the measurement of interoceptive awareness Murphy, Jennifer Catmur, Caroline Bird, Geoffrey Psychon Bull Rev Theoretical Review It has been suggested that individual differences in interoception (the perception of the body’s internal state) can be divided into three distinct dimensions: interoceptive accuracy (performance on objective tests of interoceptive accuracy), interoceptive sensibility (self-reported beliefs concerning one’s own interoception) and interoceptive awareness (a metacognitive measure indexed by the correspondence between interoceptive accuracy and interoceptive sensibility). Research conducted under this model underscores the importance of interoceptive awareness for a variety of disorder-specific and transdiagnostic symptoms. However, the clinical importance of interoceptive awareness means that this aspect of interoception warrants further scrutiny, and such scrutiny suggests that revision of the three-dimensional model of interoception is necessary. In this theoretical paper, we outline such a revision, highlighting a need to distinguish not only how interoception is measured (objective measures vs. self-report), but also what is measured (accuracy vs. attention). The model refines how individual differences in interoception are categorised, with important consequences for the measurement of interoceptive awareness. Such a revision may help researchers to identify the strengths and weaknesses in interoception observed across clinical conditions, and to isolate clinically relevant individual differences. Springer US 2019-07-03 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6797703/ /pubmed/31270764 http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01632-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Theoretical Review
Murphy, Jennifer
Catmur, Caroline
Bird, Geoffrey
Classifying individual differences in interoception: Implications for the measurement of interoceptive awareness
title Classifying individual differences in interoception: Implications for the measurement of interoceptive awareness
title_full Classifying individual differences in interoception: Implications for the measurement of interoceptive awareness
title_fullStr Classifying individual differences in interoception: Implications for the measurement of interoceptive awareness
title_full_unstemmed Classifying individual differences in interoception: Implications for the measurement of interoceptive awareness
title_short Classifying individual differences in interoception: Implications for the measurement of interoceptive awareness
title_sort classifying individual differences in interoception: implications for the measurement of interoceptive awareness
topic Theoretical Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6797703/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31270764
http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01632-7
work_keys_str_mv AT murphyjennifer classifyingindividualdifferencesininteroceptionimplicationsforthemeasurementofinteroceptiveawareness
AT catmurcaroline classifyingindividualdifferencesininteroceptionimplicationsforthemeasurementofinteroceptiveawareness
AT birdgeoffrey classifyingindividualdifferencesininteroceptionimplicationsforthemeasurementofinteroceptiveawareness