Research Institute for Psychological Sciences, Université catholique de Louvain , Louvain-la-Neuve , Belgium.
Fund for Scientific Research (FRS-FNRS) , Bruxelles , Belgium.
Cogn Emot. 2019 Dec;33(8):1627-1638. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2019.1591345. Epub 2019 Mar 14.
In four studies (total = 534), we examined the moderating impact of Interoceptive Accuracy (i.e. IAcc, as measured with the heartbeat counting task) and Interoceptive Sensibility (IS, assessed via questionnaire) on negative affect, following social exclusion or after receiving negative feedback. Results from an integrative data analysis combining the four studies confirmed that the manipulations were successful at inducing negative affect. However, no significant interaction between mood induction (control versus negative affect induction) and interoception on mood measures was observed, and this was true both for objective (i.e. IAcc) and subjective (i.e. IS) measures of interoception. Hence, previous conclusions on the moderating impact of interoception in the relationship between mood induction and self-reported mood were neither replicated nor generalised to this larger sample. We discuss these findings in light of theories of emotion regulation as well as recent concerns raised about the validity of the heartbeat counting task.
在四项研究中(总计 534 人),我们考察了内感受准确性(即 IAcc,通过心跳计数任务测量)和内感受敏感性(IS,通过问卷评估)对内感受的调节作用在社会排斥或收到负面反馈后对负面情绪的影响。对四项研究进行综合数据分析的结果证实,这些操作成功地诱发了负面情绪。然而,在情绪测量上,情绪诱导(控制与负面情绪诱导)与内感受之间没有观察到显著的交互作用,这对于内感受的客观(即 IAcc)和主观(即 IS)测量都是如此。因此,之前关于在情绪诱导和自我报告的情绪之间的关系中内感受的调节作用的结论既没有在更大的样本中得到复制,也没有得到推广。我们根据情绪调节理论以及最近对心跳计数任务有效性的担忧来讨论这些发现。