CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 112Psychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsPain Management and Placebo EffectAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

On the interaction of self-regulation, interoception and pain perception

Open access
Weiss, Sarah, Sack, Martin, Henningsen, Peter, Pollatos, Olga·2014·Psychopathology
DOI 10.1159/000365107
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background: Interoceptive processes were found to be associated with better self-regulation capacities in healthy participants. Further empirical research suggests that interoceptive sensitivity is also important for the perception of pain both in healthy participants and in somatoform patients. Nevertheless, little is known about the interaction of interoceptive processes and self-regulation for pain. We therefore conducted a study examining the interaction of interoception and self-regulation in somatoform patients. Methods: We investigated interoceptive sensitivity and self-regulatory capacities in 30 somatoform patients and 30 healthy controls when experimentally assessing pain threshold and pain tolerance. Results: Interoceptive sensitivity was associated with better self-regulation capacities. Somatoform patients exhibited a significantly reduced interoceptive sensitivity and reduced self-regulatory capacities as assessed by self-report. Additionally, pain tolerance was significantly increased in somatoform patients as compared to controls. Conclusions: Our findings highlight that interoceptive sensitivity differentially interacts with pain and self-regulation both in healthy participants and somatoform patients. This might provide ideas for novel therapeutic interventions, e.g. a combined training of interoceptive sensitivity with certain aspects of self-regulation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000365107

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • IAc is positively associated with higher emotional awareness, intensity, and regulation.

    “On the other, studies show how IAc is positively associated with a higher emotional awareness, intensity, and regulation [38,41,42,43,44,45,46,47].”

    From Interoceptive Ability and Emotion Regulation in Mind–Body Interventions: An Integrative Review (2024) · cites this paper as [44]

    The Correlations between Self-Regulation, Interoception and Pain Measures section reports that higher interoceptive sensitivity is associated with greater self-regulatory capacity, including affect differentiation and tolerance. The Introduction links interoceptive sensitivity to emotional experience, but does not establish a positive association with emotional intensity; it also does not directly measure emotional awareness. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Studies exploring the role IAc plays in emotion regulation focused mainly on cognitive reappraisal (antecedent-focused) and expressive suppression (response-focused).

    “Studies aimed at exploring the role IAc plays in emotion regulation (see Table S1) focused mainly on two specific strategies from the process model: cognitive reappraisal (antecedent-focused), interpreting a situation in a way that influences its emotional impact, and expressive suppression (response-focused), inhibiting the expression of emotional behavior [43,44,45,46].”

    From Interoceptive Ability and Emotion Regulation in Mind–Body Interventions: An Integrative Review (2024) · cites this paper as [44]

    The Discussion links interoceptive sensitivity with self-regulation and cites an association with better emotion regulation in response to negative affect. But this paper does not say that studies of interoceptive accuracy focused mainly on cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression, or examine those two strategies itself. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • IAc supports self-regulation capacities and is positively correlated with frustration tolerance, affect differentiation, and affect tolerance.

    “Similarly, Weiss et al. [44] found that IAc supports self-regulation capacities and is positively correlated with frustration tolerance as well as with affect differentiation and affect tolerance.”

    From Interoceptive Ability and Emotion Regulation in Mind–Body Interventions: An Integrative Review (2024) · cites this paper as [44]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. [16]16. Wiens S: Interoception in emotional experi- ence. Curr Opin Neurol 2005; 18: 442-447.
  2. [21]21. Weiss /Sack /Henningsen /Pollatos Psychopathology 2014;47:377-382 DOI: 10.1159/000365107 382
  3. [29]29. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, de Gruy FVI, Linzer M, Williams JB, Brody D, Davies M: Multiso- matoform disorder. An alternative to undif- ferentiated somatoform disorder for the so- matizing patient in primary care. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1997; 54: 352-358.
  4. [32]32. American Psychiatric Association: Diagnos- tic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disor- ders, ed 4 (DSM-IV). Washington, APA Press, 1994.
  5. [33]33. Jäger B, Schmid-Ott G, Dölle-Lange E, Sack M: Development and validation of an inven- tory of ego functions and self-regulation (Hannover Self-Regulation Inventory, HSRI) (in German). Fortschr Neurol Psychiatrie 2012; 80: 336-343.
  6. [38]38. Rolke R, Magerl W, Campbell KA, Schalber C, Caspari S, Birklein F, Treede RD: Quantita- tive sensory testing: a comprehensive proto- col for clinical trials. Eur J Pain 2006; 10: 77- 88.
  7. [40]40. Fuchs T, Schlimme JE: Embodiment and psy- chopathology: a phenomenological perspec- tive. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2009; 22: 570-575.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Weiss, S., Sack, M., Henningsen, P., & Pollatos, O.
Affiliations
  • Universität Ulm (DE)
  • Technical University of Munich (DE)
ORCID
Venue
Psychopathology
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2014
Volume
47
Issue
6
Pages
377-382
ISSN
  • 0254-4962 (ISSN-L)
  • 1423-033X
DOI
10.1159/000365107
OpenAlex
W2024958342
Semantic Scholar
99461c3b3a5e0f29d3b2ca03efef9d88f3bceea9
Cited by
112
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1
FWCI
4.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Psychopathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • OPen Access Repositorium der Universität Ulm (OPARU) (Ulm University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion)
  • Universität Ulm, Kommunikations- und Informationszentrum (kiz)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Pain Management and Placebo Effect
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
interoception, interoceptive sensitivity, self-regulation, pain perception, pain tolerance, pain threshold, somatoform disorders, somatic symptom disorder
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Female, Germany, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pressure, Social Control, Informal, Somatoform Disorders, Case-Control Studies, Pain Threshold, Self Report, Pain Perception, Interoception

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review