ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2025
How interoceptive sensibility moderates decision-making: an fMRI study of neuroforecasting mobile games engagement.
Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Inconsistent Bodily Feedback? Interoceptive Sensibility Affects Internet Gaming Disorder in Emerging Adults.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
Neuroscientists in decision science have advanced an affect-integration-motivation (AIM) framework, demonstrating that neural activity associated with positive affect or value integration can predict individual and aggregate choice. Given that individuals with higher interoceptive sensibility (IS) have tendency to engage their bodily sensations and thus exhibit a more coherent pattern between their neural, affective, and behavioral measures, we investigated how IS may interact with the affective/integrative components for predicting individual and aggregate choice. Thus, we 1) explored neural underpinnings of individual choice, affective ratings, aggregate outcomes, 2) examined how the above-mentioned measures predict individual and aggregate choices on mobile games, and 3) tested the moderation effect of IS by comparing the differences in how these measures perform in prediction models between subgroups of IS. Neuroimaging results showed that individual choice associated with NAcc activity, aggregate download rate tracked by regions in salience network, and revenue additionally tracked by regions in motor tendency and attention regulation. Affective ratings and AIns activity predicted individual download choice; mPFC activity forecasted aggregate download rate, and positive arousal forecasted aggregate revenue. As hypothesized, the high IS group displayed coherent correlations between affective ratings, individual choice, and neural measures. More importantly, at the aggregate level, mPFC activity (integrative component), forecasted aggregate download rate above and beyond ratings and individual choice in the high IS group, with this prediction significantly stronger compared with the low IS group. These findings extend the AIM framework by shedding light on the influence of interoceptive sensibility on the neurobehavioral mechanisms underlying human decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39653867What 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.