2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2020.107949
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The relationship between heartbeat counting and heartbeat discrimination: A meta-analysis

Abstract: Interoception concerns the perception of the body's internal state. Despite the importance of this ability for health and aspects of higher-order cognition, its measurement remains problematic. Most studies of interoception employ one of two tasks: the heartbeat counting or heartbeat discrimination task. These tasks are thought to index common abilities, an assertion often used to justify the use of a single measure of cardiac interoception. However, mixed findings regarding the relationship between performanc… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
19
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 48 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 83 publications
3
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In previous studies, the correlation between heartbeat counting and heartbeat discrimination tasks has been controversial; some researchers have reported positive correlations (Garfinkel et al , 2015; Garfinkel et al , 2016; Kandasamy et al , 2016; Rae et al , 2019), whereas others have reported no correlation (Forkmann et al , 2016; Ring and Brener, 2018; Herman et al , 2019). An integrative review of these studies suggests a weak correlation of 0.20 (Hickman et al , 2020), which is close to that of the present study. Contrary to the previous studies, we devised two new heartbeat discrimination indices ( A and σ).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…In previous studies, the correlation between heartbeat counting and heartbeat discrimination tasks has been controversial; some researchers have reported positive correlations (Garfinkel et al , 2015; Garfinkel et al , 2016; Kandasamy et al , 2016; Rae et al , 2019), whereas others have reported no correlation (Forkmann et al , 2016; Ring and Brener, 2018; Herman et al , 2019). An integrative review of these studies suggests a weak correlation of 0.20 (Hickman et al , 2020), which is close to that of the present study. Contrary to the previous studies, we devised two new heartbeat discrimination indices ( A and σ).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…Validity issues with the HCT are also apparent when considering that HCT performance is associated with heart rate estimation strategies (Desmedt et al, 2020) and physiological variables (e.g., heart rate; Rouse, Jones, & Jones, 1988;Zamariola et al, 2018). As a further significant concern, a recent meta-analysis showed that HCT performance is weakly associated (r = 0.21, p < .001, R 2 = 4.4 %) with another common measure of cardiac IAcc (i.e., the Heartbeat Discrimination Task; Hickman, Seyedsalehi, Cook, Bird, & Murphy, 2020). Finally, scores on this task vary in test-retest (< 6 months) reliability (r = ∼0.41 to 0.81; Murphy et al, 2019).…”
Section: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis On The Association Between Heartbeat Countingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These are better measured with the discrimination paradigm. Interestingly, studies applying this method revealed similar results (see, e.g., Wiens et al, 2000) as the ones with the Schandry task, despite their differences (Hickman et al, 2020). To get a clear picture, the further investigation of the subject including both heartbeat perception paradigms would be worthy.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 70%
“…The debate about the validity of the heartbeat perception tasks if far from reaching a conclusion, both the Schandry task (see, e.g., Ainley et al, 2020;Corneille et al, 2020;Flynn & Clemens, 1988;Montgomery & Jones, 1984;Ring & Brener, 1996;Zamariola et al, 2018;Zimprich et al, 2020) and the discrimination tasks (see, e.g., Carroll, 1977;Couto et al, 2015;Pennebaker & Hoover, 1984) have been criticised extensively. It is also worth to mention that a recent meta-analysis questions the interchangeability of the two paradigms (i.e., tracking and discrimination, see, Hickman et al, 2020). In the following, we are going to focus only on studies that apply the mental tracking task, as these represent the majority of the related studies.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%