Interoception in Autism Spectrum Disorder: A review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This review article summarizes original scientific research published to date on interoception in individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Sensory processing has been shown to be atypical in ASD, yet physiological processing and subjective experience of internal sensation processing, namely interoception, has not been reported sufficiently in research or clinical settings. BACKGROUND: There is a small but growing body of scientific research on interoception in ASD, which is relevant to understanding the behavioral and cognitive characteristics inherent in this condition, and may provide a foundation for clinical interventions such as biofeedback, pain management, and brain stimulation techniques. METHODS: A literature review of original research was performed using major scientific databases. RESULTS: Interoception, which occurs due to multisensory connections and integration of internal afferents in cortical and subcortical areas, is atypical in ASD, but the degree and directionality of this abnormality is not yet clear due to the heterogeneity of the condition. Between-group interoceptive differences in individuals with and without ASD have been repeatedly demonstrated, with a slight tendency towards hyporeactivity in interoceptive awareness in individuals with ASD. SIGNIFICANCE: Multidimensional research combining neuroimaging with psychophysiological and self-report measures guided by a clear theoretical model is necessary to understand how interoceptive differences link to the behavioral and cognitive characteristics of ASD. Sensory processing models and autism theory should also be updated to incorporate these recent findings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it