Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32341167›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2020

Heart-brain interactions shape somatosensory perception and evoked potentials.

Esra Al, Fivos Iliopoulos, Norman Forschack, Till Nierhaus, Martin Grund, Paweł Motyka, Michael Gaebler, Vadim V Nikulin, Arno Villringer

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 117 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
117citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

117 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Illusory cold desensitizes touch.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Model-based cardiac field artefact correction for OP-MEG.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026
    Article
  20. Review

57 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Esra AlDepartment of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, 04103 Leipzig, Germany; esraal@cbs.mpg.de villringer@cbs.mpg.de.ORCID 0000-0002-0582-4231
Fivos IliopoulosDepartment of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Norman ForschackDepartment of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2525-7059
Till NierhausDepartment of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Martin GrundDepartment of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1487-8506
Paweł MotykaFaculty of Psychology, University of Warsaw, 00-927 Warsaw, Poland.
Michael GaeblerDepartment of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Vadim V NikulinDepartment of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Arno VillringerDepartment of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, 04103 Leipzig, Germany; esraal@cbs.mpg.de villringer@cbs.mpg.de.ORCID 0000-0003-2604-2404

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Even though humans are mostly not aware of their heartbeats, several heartbeat-related effects have been reported to influence conscious perception. It is not clear whether these effects are distinct or related phenomena, or whether they are early sensory effects or late decisional processes. Combining electroencephalography and electrocardiography, along with signal detection theory analyses, we identify two distinct heartbeat-related influences on conscious perception differentially related to early vs. late somatosensory processing. First, an effect on early sensory processing was found for the heartbeat-evoked potential (HEP), a marker of cardiac interoception. The amplitude of the prestimulus HEP negatively correlated with localization and detection of somatosensory stimuli, reflecting a more conservative detection bias (criterion). Importantly, higher HEP amplitudes were followed by decreases in early (P50) as well as late (N140, P300) somatosensory-evoked potential (SEP) amplitudes. Second, stimulus timing along the cardiac cycle also affected perception. During systole, stimuli were detected and correctly localized less frequently, relating to a shift in perceptual sensitivity. This perceptual attenuation was accompanied by the suppression of only late SEP components (P300) and was stronger for individuals with a more stable heart rate. Both heart-related effects were independent of alpha oscillations' influence on somatosensory processing. We explain cardiac cycle timing effects in a predictive coding account and suggest that HEP-related effects might reflect spontaneous shifts between interoception and exteroception or modulations of general attentional resources. Thus, our results provide a general conceptual framework to explain how internal signals can be integrated into our conscious perception of the world.

Indexed as

AdultAttentionAwarenessBrainBrain MappingConsciousnessElectrocardiographyElectroencephalographyEvoked PotentialsEvoked Potentials, SomatosensoryFemaleHeartHeart RateHumansInteroceptionMalebody–brain interactionconsciousnessEEGrhythmssomatosensory awareness

Identifiers

PMID32341167
PMCPMC7229654

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.