ArticleJournal of eating disorders2024
Evaluating the predictions of an interoceptive inference model of bulimia nervosa.
Article in Journal of eating disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Disordered Minds, Disordered Meals: When Emotions Masquerade as Hunger in Eating Disorders-A Systematic Review.Nutrients · 2026Pooled it
- Self-reported interoceptive sensibility across eating disorder symptoms: associations with sociodemographic factors.Journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- Relationships between self-esteem, self-efficacy, and interoceptive awareness among pole dancers: a network analysis.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveBulimia nervosa (BN) is associated with loss-of-control (LOC) eating episodes that frequently occur in response to negative emotions. According to recent neurocomputational models, this link could be explained by a failure to accurately update beliefs about the body in states of high arousal. Specifically, these interoceptive inference models suggest that under-relying on signals from one's body about sensory experience ("low sensory precision") and/or over-relying on previously held beliefs ("excessively precise priors") lead to inaccurate perception and maladaptive behaviors. We conducted an initial test of these core predictions of the interoceptive inference model in BN using self-report measures.
methodsWe compared women with BN (n = 30) and age-, BMI-, and full-scale IQ-matched controls (n = 31) on trust in sensory information from the body and two types of beliefs about what can be done to regulate high negative affect. Within the BN group, we tested interrelations among these measures and explored their associations with LOC eating frequency.
resultsCompared with healthy controls, the BN group reported lower levels of trust in sensory information and stronger beliefs that once upset, there is little one can do, apart from eating, to self-regulate. These beliefs were associated with each other and with lower body trust. Beliefs about the uncontrollability of emotion were associated with more frequent subjective binge-eating episodes.
conclusionsFindings provide initial support for the core predictions of an interoceptive inference account of BN: low trust in sensory information ("sensory precision") may promote an overreliance on maladaptive "prior beliefs" about the effects of eating on negative emotions, ultimately interfering with accurate updating of beliefs about other strategies that could regulate emotions and maintain LOC eating. Low body trust, strong expectations about emotions, and their neurocomputational underpinnings could be promising combined treatment targets for BN.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.