ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Embodied simulation, body language, and symbolization: understanding somatic symptoms in psychoanalysis.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Classical psychoanalysis has traditionally focused on uncovering unconscious conflicts through language-the so-called `talking cure`. However, contemporary research underscores the importance of embodied simulation, body language, and their symbolic representation in understanding and addressing patient's somatic symptoms. This occurs particularly when individuals seeking psychological help are unable to use spoken words to express their feelings, which is why communication between patient and therapist takes place at a pre-verbal level, within the space of "intercorporeality." In this paper we explore the interplay between early development, mentalization, language acquisition and somatic disorders as failures of symbolization that manifest in bodily distress. In psychoanalytic psychotherapy these processes can be studied as transference-countertransference interactions. We describe the observed clinical phenomena in terms of intersubjective communication grounded in embodied simulation theory, showing how bodily symptoms emerge when mentalization fails and countertransference is enacted at a concrete, somatic level. For this, a clinical vignette illustrates how severe deficits in mentalization produce concrete somatic enactments and embodied countertransference in the therapist, suggesting a neurobiological substrate in pathological intersubjective resonance. We also compare a clinical vignette to human interaction with an AI as a vivid illustration of what happens when there is 'nobody' (or 'no body') as a human counterpart in communication. LLMs lack bodily resonance and therefore cannot substitute for the therapeutic processes that rely on embodied simulation. Thus, our paper describes phenomenological observations of interbody communication in therapy caused by symbolization failure, integrates several theoretical and experimental approaches (intersubjectivity, embodied simulation, interbrain synchronization) to explain it, points at further directions of scientific research and indicates potential dangers for therapists and patients using modern AI technologies.
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.