2023年度日本認知科学会第40回大会

P1-057A

内受容感覚の性差：身体感覚・情動の未分化が女性の心拍知覚メタ
認知の低下を予測する
Gender difference in interoception: Women with undifferentiatedbodily/emotional feeling show decreased interoceptive metacognition
晴木 祐助1, 2, *, 金子 景1, 小川 健二1Yusuke Haruki, Kei Kaneko, and Kenji Ogawa
1北海道大学，2日本学術振興会

Hokkaido University, Japan Society for the Promotion of Science*haruki@let.hokudai.ac.jp

Abstract

have shown that women generally exhibit moreInteroception refers to the perceptions arising from theinternal body's physiological processes. Researchers havesuggested a gender difference in interoception, with women
more likely to report somatic symptoms in association withmental disorders, possibly due to reduced metacognitive
ability in interoception. In this study, we examined genderdifferences in three interoceptive aspects and their link toindividual interoception tendencies using behavioral tests andquestionnaires. Our findings revealed no statisticallysignificant gender differences in perceptual accuracy,
confidence, or metacognitive ability in interoception.
However, we did observe a decline in interoceptive
metacognition among women who strongly linked bodily
sensations to emotional experiences in daily life, a pattern notobserved in men. These results empirically support the ideathat women may be more vulnerable to impaired interoceptive
metacognition associated with bodily/emotional feelings,
which could lead to inaccurate evaluations of physiologicalstates.
Keywords ―difference

moderate perceptual accuracy in interoception
compared to men [4, 5].
However, beyond perceptual accuracy, otheraspectsofinteroceptive

awareness,suchassubjective confidence and metacognitive ability(insight) [1], have not been thoroughly explored inrelation to gender differences. In this study, we aimed
to investigate gender disparities in interoceptive
accuracy, confidence, and insight using a modified
heartbeat counting task that provided a more robust
statisticalevaluation

ofinteroceptive

insight.

Additionally, we assessed individual tendencies in
day-to-day

interoception

experiences

using

a

questionnaire, which served as a potential modulator
ofinteroception, metacognition, gender

genderdifferences

ininteroception.

We

hypothesized that men would exhibit higher
interoceptive accuracy and insight and also that1.

Introduction

reduced interoceptive insight may be associated withIn recent decades, there has been a growing

individual dispositions toward interoception ininterest in interoception, which refers to thewomen.

perception of bodily sensations. Researchers havefocused on understanding individual differences insubjectiveawarenessA total of 78 volunteers (41 women, 37 men)interoceptive awareness) using various methods,

participated in the study. All participants wereincluding behavioral tests and questionnaires [1].

undergraduate students at Hokkaido University,Oneinteroceptive

with an average age of XX years. Each participant

awareness is gender, as women tend to experience

received a 1000 yen Amazon gift card upon

greater physiological (especially hormonal) changes

completion of the one-hour experiment. Five[2]. Moreover, from the clinical perspective, there areparticipants (four women, one man) were excluded

much more risks of common mental disorders infrom the statistical analysis due to excessive noise in

women, particularly with somatic symptoms (i.e.,theatypical interoceptive awareness) [3]. In line withaccurate calculation of their heart rate. Consequently,

this, recent meta-analyses regarding behavioral tests

our final sample included 73 participants (37 women,

factorinteroception

Materials and methods(i.e.,

potentialof

2.

influencing

252

physiologicalrecordings,

which

prevented

2023年度日本認知科学会第40回大会

P1-057A36 men), which met the minimum sample size

associated with such a small sample, which canrequirement (n = 34) needed to achieve sufficientresult in inaccurate estimates of the true correlation.

statistical power (1 - β = .80) for detecting medium toSpecifically, computing the correlation coefficientlarge effect sizes of correlation coefficients (ρ = .40) atbased on six pairs, assuming a medium-to-large

a given type-1 error probability (α = .05) for both

population correlation coefficient (ρ = .50), yields agenders. Prior to participating in the study, allstandard error of .43.

participants provided written informed consent. The

The photoplethysmography (PPG) signals obtained

study was conducted in accordance with theduring the task trials were analyzed using theDeclaration

subsequentHeartpy module in Python. To ensure the integrity ofamendments, and the experimental protocol was

the recorded PPG signals for each participant, weapproved by the Ethics Committee of Hokkaido

first applied a third-order low-pass filter to the PPG

University.

time series to reduce noise. Subsequently, weofHelsinki

and

its

To assess participants' interoceptive accuracy,

meticulously examined each trial to identify any

confidence in their accuracy, and insight into theirerroneous or missing peak detections. During thisinteroceptive abilities, we utilized a heartbeatexamination, we identified two or more unreliablecounting task. During each trial, participants silently

PPG time series in four out of the 77 participants,

counted the number of their heartbeats that occurred

rendering it impossible to accurately calculate thewithin specific durations (15 s, 25 s, 35 s, or 45 s),number of heartbeats. Consequently, these four

focusing on the sensations of their heartbeat.

participants were excluded from further analyses.

Immediately after each trial, participants reported

For the remaining participants, the number ofthe counted number using a visual slider with a digit

heartbeats and heart rate were calculated using thescale.

theirpreprocessed PPG time series for each trial.

confidence in their interoceptive accuracy on a visual

Subsequently, we determined the interoceptive

slider ranging from 0 (no perception of heartbeats) toaccuracy, confidence, and insight for each participant100

werebased on the recorded and reported number ofexplicitly instructed to count only the heartbeats they

heartbeats across the 20 trials. The formulations

were unquestionably able to detect, prohibiting theused for these calculations are as follows:

Additionally,(completeparticipantsperception).

rated

Participants

use of strategies unrelated to heartbeat detection(e.g., estimating time or the number of heartbeats),
as such strategies have been shown to inflate
interoceptive accuracy.
A total of 20 trials were completed by participants,
with each duration presented in a randomized order,
consisting of five trials for each duration. Every five

Following the completion of the heartbeat counting

trials, participants were given a break to rest astask,needed. The increased number of trials was intended

questionnaire:toMultidimensional

quantify

interoceptive

therobust

accuracy

relationshipandbetween

confidence(i.e.,participants

AwarenessthewereJapaneseAssessment(MAIA)

toadministeredversionofa
theofInteroceptive

evaluateinteroceptive

interoceptive insight). Previous studies, such as thesensibility. The MAIA questionnaire comprises 32

work by Garfinkel and colleagues [1], calculated

statements that capture various aspects of daily

Pearson's

betweenexperiences related to interoception [6]. For example,

interoceptive accuracy and confidence based on onlyparticipants are asked to rate statements such as

six trials. However, this approach is problematic due"When I am tense, I notice where the tension isto the high level of uncertainty and potential bias

located in my body." Responses to these statements

correlation

coefficient2532023年度日本認知科学会第40回大会

P1-057A

are given on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 0emphasized by two recent meta-analyses [4, 5]. In(never) to 5 (always). Interoceptive sensibility isaddition,assessedfactors

interoceptive insight, the individual consistencyrepresented by the MAIA: noticing, not distracting,between perceptual accuracy and its subjective

notemotional

confidence. These results were somewhat unexpected,

awareness, self-regulation, body listening, andgiven previous research indicating that women tend

trusting. All questionnaires were administered

to have lower interoceptive accuracy while reporting

through an online form. The order of the statements

heightened bodily awareness, especially related towithin the questionnaire was randomized tosymptoms, more frequently than men [3].

acrossworrying,eightattention

independentregulation,

there

was

nomeandifference

inminimize order effects. Interoceptive sensibility wasInstead for the mean difference, we found a gendercalculated as multidimensional components based on

difference in the relationship between interoceptive

the eight factors assessed by the MAIA questionnaire.

insight and individual dispositions to interoception

In our statistical analyses, we first compared(Figure 2, p < .001). There was a negative correlationinteroceptive accuracy, confidence, and intensity

betweenbetween genders using tow sample t-tests. Moreover,emotional awareness scale in the MAIA in women

we tried to compare the relationship between(rwomen = -.54, p < .001; rmen = .14, p = .43), suggesting

interoceptive insight and participants’ disposition

that women who tend to consider their bodily

about interoception across genders. To this end, we

fluctuation as more emotional than perceptual had

calculated

betweendecreased interoceptive insight. This result mightinteroceptive insight and each factor of MAIA for bothelaborate the gender difference in interoceptivegenders. Then it was statistically tested if there wasawareness frequently observed in clinical settings,

a gender difference in these correlations, by usingwith women often reporting somatic symptoms inLenhard’s method [7]. We conducted multiple

mental illness.

correlation

coefficients

individualinteroceptive

insight

andcomparison corrections using the Bonferroni method
for our t-tests (α = .05/3 = .017) and correlational tests(α = .05/8 = .006), respectively.

3.

Results and discussion

First of all, we did not find any significant genderdifference in interoceptive accuracy, confidence, andmetacognitive insight (Figure 1, all ps > .18).
Particularly, our data did not show the genderdifference in interoceptive accuracy that has been

Figure 2. Gender differences in the relationshipbetween interoceptive insight and individual
tendency to discriminate their bodily feelings fromemotional ones.
Taken together, the present study revealed that

Figure 1. Mean differences in interoceptive
accuracy, confidence, and insight between genders.

women

254

withundifferentiatedbodily/emotional

2023年度日本認知科学会第40回大会

P1-057A

feeling show decreased interoceptive insight whilegroup-level gender differences in interoceptive
awareness were not observed.

References[1] S. N. Garfinkel, A. K. Seth, A. B. Barrett, K. Suzuki,and H. D. Critchley, “Knowing your own heart:
distinguishinginteroceptive
accuracy
frominteroceptive awareness,” Biol. Psychol., vol. 104, pp.
65–74, Jan. 2015.
[2] J. Murphy, E. Viding, and G. Bird, “Does atypicalinteroception following physical change contribute tosex differences in mental illness?,” Psychol. Rev., vol.
126, no. 5, pp. 787–789, Oct. 2019.
[3] S. S. Khalsa and R. C. Lapidus, “Can Interoception
Improve the Pragmatic Search for Biomarkers inPsychiatry?,” Front. Psychiatry, vol. 7, p. 121, Jul. 2016.
[4] O. Desmedt, M. Van Den Houte, M. Walentynowicz, S.
Dekeyser, O. Luminet, and O. Corneille, “How Does
Heartbeat Counting Task Performance Relate to
Theoretically-Relevant Mental Health Outcomes? A
Meta-Analysis,” Collabra: Psychology, vol. 8, no. 1, Jan.
2022.
[5] F. Prentice and J. Murphy, “Sex differences ininteroceptive accuracy: A meta-analysis,” Neurosci.
Biobehav. Rev., vol. 132, pp. 497–518, Jan. 2022.
[6] W. E. Mehling, C. Price, J. J. Daubenmier, M. Acree, E.
Bartmess, and A. Stewart, “The Multidimensional
Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness (MAIA),” PLoS
One, vol. 7, no. 11, p. e48230, Nov. 2012.
[7] W. Lenhard and A. Lenhard, “Hypothesis Tests forComparing Correlations,” Psychometrica, 2014.
[Online].
Available:
https://www.psychometrica.de/correlation.html.

255