Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39323015›Full record

ArticlePsychophysiology2024

Exploring sex differences in cardiac interoceptive accuracy using the phase adjustment task.

Ria Spooner, Jonathan M Bird, Nerea Irigoras Izagirre, Rhea Clemente, Elisa Fernandez Fueyo, Gemma Budworth, Dorina Cocirla, Jennifer Todd, Jane Aspell, Mateo Leganes and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychophysiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Ria SpoonerDepartment of Psychology, Royal Holloway, University of London, London, UK.
Jonathan M BirdDepartment of Management, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Nerea Irigoras IzagirreDepartment of Psychology, Royal Holloway, University of London, London, UK.
Rhea ClementeDepartment of Psychology, Royal Holloway, University of London, London, UK.
Elisa Fernandez FueyoDepartment of Biological Sciences, Royal Holloway, University of London, London, UK.
Gemma BudworthDepartment of Psychology, Royal Holloway, University of London, London, UK.
Dorina CocirlaDepartment of Psychology, Royal Holloway, University of London, London, UK.
Jennifer ToddSchool of Psychology and Sport Science, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UK.
Jane AspellSchool of Psychology and Sport Science, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UK.
Mateo LeganesLouvain Experimental Psychopathology Research Group (LEP), Psychological Science Research Institute, UCLouvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
Dawn WatlingDepartment of Psychology, Royal Holloway, University of London, London, UK.
David PlansDepartment of Psychology, Royal Holloway, University of London, London, UK.
Rebecca BrewerDepartment of Psychology, Royal Holloway, University of London, London, UK.
Jennifer MurphyDepartment of Psychology, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8945-3337

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/T008709/1British Academy SRG20\200146Center of Alcohol and Substance Use Studies at Rutgers UniversityEconomic and Social Research Council ES/P00072X/1Medical Research Council MR/S003509/1MRF MR/S003509/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous evidence suggests males and females differ with respect to interoception-the processing of internal bodily signals-with males typically outperforming females on tasks of interoceptive accuracy. However, interpretation of existing evidence in the cardiac domain is hindered by the limitations of existing tools. In this investigation, we pooled data from several samples to examine sex differences in cardiac interoceptive accuracy on the phase adjustment task, a new measure that overcomes several limitations of the existing tools. In a sample of 266 individuals, we observed that females outperformed males, indicative of better cardiac interoceptive accuracy, but had lower confidence than males. These results held after controlling for sex differences in demographic, physiological and engagement factors. Importantly, these results were specific to the measure of cardiac interoceptive accuracy. No sex differences were observed for individuals who completed the structurally identical screener task, although a similar pattern of results was observed in relation to confidence. These surprising data suggest the presence of a female advantage for cardiac interoceptive accuracy and potential differences in interoceptive awareness (metacognition). Possible reasons for mixed results in the literature, as well as implications for theory and future research, are discussed.

Indexed as

Heart RateInteroceptionSex CharacteristicsAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleMetacognitionYoung Adultinteroceptioninteroceptive accuracyinteroceptive awarenessinteroceptive sensibilitysex differences

Identifiers

PMID39323015
PMCPMC11579228

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.