The Filter Detection Task for measurement of breathing-related interoception and metacognition

Interoception of breathing and its relationship with anxiety

“…Following three further breaths, participants removed the mouthpiece and reported their decision as to whether a resistance was added (yes or no), and their confidence in their decision (1–10, where 1 = not at all confident/guessing and 10 = maximally confident). Adapted from Harrison et al (2021a) under Creative Commons license. (B) Results from the FDT: individuals with moderate anxiety (scores of ≥35 on the Spielberger Trait Anxiety Inventory [STAI-T]) demonstrated a higher (less sensitive) perceptual threshold and lower metacognitive bias (lower average confidence) compared with individuals with low levels of anxiety (scores of 20–25 on the STAI-T).…”

“…Following three further breaths, participants removed the mouthpiece and reported their decision as to whether a resistance was added (yes or no), and their confidence in their decision (1–10, where 1 = not at all confident/guessing and 10 = maximally confident). Adapted from Harrison et al (2021a) under Creative Commons license.…”

“…To systematically test properties of breathing perception and related metacognition, we utilized a perceptual threshold breathing task (the Filter Detection Task; FDT), described in detail elsewhere ( Harrison et al., 2021a ). The FDT was used to determine interoceptive perceptual sensitivity, decision bias, metacognitive bias (self-reported confidence) and metacognitive performance (congruency between performance and confidence scores) regarding detection of very small variations in an inspiratory load.…”

“…These layers encompass multiple levels, ranging from metrics of afferent signal strength at “lower” levels (using techniques such as heartbeat evoked potentials; Allen et al., 2016 ; Petzschner et al., 2019 ) and psychophysical properties (such as measuring perceptual sensitivity; Domschke et al., 2010 ; Kleckner et al., 2015 ; Petzschner et al., 2017 ) to psychological and cognitive components at “higher” levels ( Critchley and Garfinkel, 2017 ). Notable domains within these higher levels include attention toward bodily signals ( Berner et al., 2018 ; Murphy et al., 2019 ; Wang et al., 2019 ), static and dynamic beliefs and models of body state ( Critchley and Garfinkel, 2017 ; Seth, 2013 ; Tsakiris and Critchley, 2016 ), and insight into both our interoceptive abilities ( Garfinkel et al., 2015 , Garfinkel et al., 2016a , Garfinkel et al., 2016b , Harrison et al., 2021a ) and the accuracy of our interoceptive beliefs (“metacognition”) ( Petzschner et al., 2017 ; Stephan et al., 2016 ). Importantly, research into dynamic models of body state has also connected the interoceptive literature to that of learning, where influential (Bayesian) theories of inference about the external world, such as predictive coding ( Behrens et al., 2007 ; Feldman and Friston, 2010 ; Friston, 2005 ; O’Reilly et al., 2012 ), have been extended to interoception and used to propose how the brain may build models of the changing internal environment ( Barrett and Simmons, 2015 ; Gu et al., 2013 ; Seth, 2013 ; Seth et al., 2012 ; Stephan et al., 2016 ).…”

“…Therefore, we aimed to both assess how anxiety is related to dynamic interoceptive learning and additionally provide a unifying perspective on anxiety and breathing-related interoception across the hierarchical levels of interoceptive processing. We adopted a multi-modal experimental approach to investigate multiple levels of breathing-related interoceptive processing, including low-level perceptual sensitivity and related higher level metacognition via the filter detection task (FDT) ( Harrison et al., 2021a ), subjective interoceptive beliefs via questionnaires, and trial-by-trial interoceptive learning and related brain activity in a novel breathing learning task (BLT). Both the FDT and trial-by-trial behavioral and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data from the BLT were analyzed with separate computational models.…”