Developmental Psychology, Institute of Psychology and Education, Ulm University, Albert-Einstein-Allee 47, 89081 Ulm, Germany.
Developmental Psychology, Institute of Psychology and Education, Ulm University, Albert-Einstein-Allee 47, 89081 Ulm, Germany.
Biol Psychol. 2020 Apr;152:107868. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2020.107868. Epub 2020 Feb 22.
In a recently published article, Zamariola et al. (2018) listed four problems of interoceptive accuracy (IAcc) scores as measured with Schandry's heartbeat counting task. In this comment, we clarify that IAcc scores are ratio variables, the analyses of which can result in misleading interpretations and incorrect conclusions. We examine the findings of Zamariola et al. (2018) by reanalyzing their data using statistical methods more adequate than the bivariate correlational analyses conducted by Zamariola et al. (2018) and by reinterpreting the results taking into account the fact that IAcc scores are ratio variables. Our findings indicate that the problems enlisted by Zamariola et al. (2018) can mainly be attributed to the statistical nature of IAcc scores and to the analysis approach of using bivariate correlations. We infer that the problems of IAcc scores mentioned by Zamariola et al. (2018) are not as serious as they might appear at first glance. In turn, we briefly mention some other problems of IAcc scores researchers may face based on the fact that ratio variables are bounded.
在最近发表的一篇文章中，Zamariola 等人（2018 年）列出了 Schandry 的心跳计数任务测量的内感受准确性（IAcc）得分的四个问题。在本评论中，我们澄清说，IAcc 得分是比率变量，对其进行分析可能会导致误解和错误的结论。我们通过重新分析 Zamariola 等人（2018 年）的数据，使用比 Zamariola 等人（2018 年）进行的双变量相关分析更合适的统计方法，以及考虑到 IAcc 得分是比率变量这一事实重新解释结果，来检验 Zamariola 等人（2018 年）的研究结果。我们的研究结果表明，Zamariola 等人（2018 年）列出的问题主要归因于 IAcc 得分的统计性质和使用双变量相关性进行分析的方法。我们推断，Zamariola 等人（2018 年）提到的 IAcc 得分问题并不像乍一看那么严重。反过来，我们根据比率变量是有界的事实，简要提到了研究人员可能面临的其他一些 IAcc 得分问题。
