Cited by 653Psychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsPsychometric Methodologies and TestingEating Disorders and Behaviors

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 175 of the 176 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 51 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Body awareness: construct and self-report measures.

Open access

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Heightened body awareness can be adaptive and maladaptive. Improving body awareness has been suggested as an approach for treating patients with conditions such as chronic pain, obesity and post-traumatic stress disorder. We assessed the psychometric quality of selected self-report measures and examined their items for underlying definitions of the construct. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, PsychINFO, HaPI, Embase, Digital Dissertations Database. REVIEW METHODS: Abstracts were screened; potentially relevant instruments were obtained and systematically reviewed. Instruments were excluded if they exclusively measured anxiety, covered emotions without related physical sensations, used observer ratings only, or were unobtainable. We restricted our study to the proprioceptive and interoceptive channels of body awareness. The psychometric properties of each scale were rated using a structured evaluation according to the method of McDowell. Following a working definition of the multi-dimensional construct, an inter-disciplinary team systematically examined the items of existing body awareness instruments, identified the dimensions queried and used an iterative qualitative process to refine the dimensions of the construct. RESULTS: From 1,825 abstracts, 39 instruments were screened. 12 were included for psychometric evaluation. Only two were rated as high standard for reliability, four for validity. Four domains of body awareness with 11 sub-domains emerged. Neither a single nor a compilation of several instruments covered all dimensions. Key domains that might potentially differentiate adaptive and maladaptive aspects of body awareness were missing in the reviewed instruments. CONCLUSION: Existing self-report instruments do not address important domains of the construct of body awareness, are unable to discern between adaptive and maladaptive aspects of body awareness, or exhibit other psychometric limitations. Restricting the construct to its proprio- and interoceptive channels, we explore the current understanding of the multi-dimensional construct and suggest next steps for further research.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This systematic review assessed self-report instruments for body awareness and found that existing measures have limited psychometric quality and do not cover key dimensions of the construct. The authors propose a four-domain, 11-sub-domain model and conclude that a new multidimensional instrument is needed.

Key findings

  • From 1,825 abstracts, 39 instruments were screened; 12 were included for psychometric evaluation and 27 were excluded.
  • Only two instruments were rated as high standard for reliability and four for validity; the BAQ was strongest with 18 psychometric “stars,” followed by PBCS (15), BVS (15), and SBC (13).
  • Four domains with 11 sub-domains emerged: Perceived Body Sensations, Attention Quality, Attitude, and Mind-Body Integration. Neither a single instrument nor a compilation of several covered all dimensions, and key domains potentially differentiating adaptive from maladaptive body awareness were missing.
  • The BAQ was uni-dimensional and explicitly excluded attention to pain sensations and emotions; the 5-item PBCS mostly measured one sub-domain, sensations of distress, worry and tension; only one body awareness instrument (SBA) included a single item for mode of attention (mindfulness versus labeling thought).

Methods

  • Systematic search of PubMed, PsycInfo, EMBASE, HAPI, and Digital Dissertations in April–May 2007; abstracts were screened, and instruments were excluded if they exclusively measured anxiety, covered emotions without related physical sensations, used observer ratings only, or were unobtainable.
  • Two reviewers independently compared psychometric characteristics using a structured evaluation adapted from McDowell, reaching consensus with a third reviewer when needed.
  • Four reviewers iteratively reviewed the anonymized item pool from included instruments plus selected mindfulness items, starting with 7 domains and refining them into 4 domains and 11 sub-domains.

Limitations

  • The paper states that no gold standard exists for criterion validity in body awareness, that none of the self-report measures had been validated against an objective measure, and that construct validation is incremental.
  • The paper states that item wording often did not clearly discriminate between dimensions, that key dimensions were missing in most instruments, and that no single or compiled instrument satisfactorily covered all dimensions; the BPQ also lacked obtainable supporting publication by its author.
  • Evident from the text: the review was restricted to proprioceptive and interoceptive channels and excluded exteroceptive/body image aspects, and the search was conducted in 2007, so later instruments are not included.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0005614

Cites

175 of 175 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Figures

Figure 1 Review Steps.
Figure 1 Review Steps.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

36 No basis given · 33 Not checked yet · 20 Own result · 17 Own interpretation · 7 Own method

Verify all 51 references — free account

Show all 61 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 29
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 27
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
52 of 52
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A 'gold standard' for assessing criterion validity in measures of body awareness does not exist.

    “A “gold standard” for assessing criterion validity in measures of body awareness does not exist.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The four domains and 11 sub-domains identified by the interdisciplinary team constitute the complete or correct set of dimensions of body awareness.

    “Following a working definition of the multi-dimensional construct, an inter-disciplinary team systematically examined the items of existing body awareness instruments, identified the dimensions queried and used an iterative qualitative process to refine the dimensions of the construct.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Therapeutic approaches claiming to enhance body awareness frequently suffer from a lack of theory and methodologically weak research.

    “These approaches are often categorized as mind-body approaches and/or manual therapies [83] and enjoy a growing popularity in the Western world [59] but frequently suffer from a lack of theory and methodologically weak research behind esoteric formulations and unfounded statements of benefits.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There is a great need to study practices of interoception and body awareness and their potential clinical benefits.

    “Although there is a great need to study practices of interoception and body awareness and their potential clinical benefits, few attempts have been made to measure changes in body awareness associated with such interventions [108]”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Aspects of mindfulness constitute a key element of body awareness.

    “as they have been widely used in the mindfulness literature, and aspects of mindfulness appear to constitute a key element of body awareness.”
5 of 5

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?

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

2 of 2

Citations

Cites

Show all 176 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [83]NIH-NCCAM 2005 Conference on the Biology of Manual Therapies June 9–10, 2005 Natcher Conference Center National Institutes of Health Bethesda, Maryland. http://nccamnihgov/news/upcomingmeetings/manual-conferencehtm
  2. [109]Farb NA Segal ZV Mayberg H Bean J McKeon D 2007 Attending to the present: mindfulness meditation reveals distinct neural modes of self-reference. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci 2 313 322 18985137 PMC2566754
  3. [143]Snell WJ Johnson G 1997 The Multidimensional Health Questionnaire. American Journal of Health Behavior 21 33 42
  4. [145]Price CJ Thompson EA 2006 Measuring dimensions of body connection: Body awareness and bodily dissociation. in press: J Altern Complement Med PMC3029599 18047441
  5. [149]Khalsa SS Rudlauf D Damasio A Davidson RJ Lutz A 2007 To feel or not to feel: interoceptive awareness in experienced meditators. poster at Annual Scientific Meeting of American Psychosomatic Society PMC2637372 18503485

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–400 of 653

Metadata

Authors
Mehling, W. E., Gopisetty, V., Daubenmier, J., Price, C. J., Hecht, F. M., & Stewart, A.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
Mehling, Wolf E.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2009-05-19
Volume
4
Issue
5
Pages
e5614
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1989241987
Cited by
653
References
176
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 64 · 2024: 66 · 2023: 54 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 50 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 42 · 2017: 43 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 16
FWCI
5.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Mount Zion Health Fund
  • National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (K23AT002298)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
Keywords
body awareness, proprioception, interoception, self-report measures, psychometric properties, construct definition, scale reliability and validity, chronic pain, obesity, post-traumatic stress disorder
MeSH terms
Humans, Psychometrics, Self-Assessment

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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