Influence of Visceral Interoceptive Experience on the Brain's Response to Food Images in Anorexia Nervosa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine how visceral sensations affect responses to food stimuli in anorexia nervosa (AN). METHODS: Twenty weight-restored, unmedicated adolescent and young adult women with AN and twenty healthy control participants completed an interoceptive attention task during which they focused on sensations from the heart, stomach, and bladder and made ratings of these sensations. They then underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging scanning while viewing pictures of food and nonfood objects. Between-groups t tests were employed to investigate group differences in the relationship between interoceptive sensation ratings and brain hemodynamic response to food pictures and, specifically, to highly palatable foods. RESULTS: In response to food pictures, AN participants exhibited a positive relationship between stomach sensation ratings and posterior insula activation (peak t = 4.30). AN participants displayed negative relationships between stomach sensation ratings and amygdala activation (peak t = -4.05) and heart sensation ratings and ventromedial prefrontal cortex activation (peak t = -3.52). In response to highly palatable foods, AN was associated with positive relationships between stomach sensation ratings and activity in the subgenual anterior cingulate (peak t = 3.88) and amygdala (peak t = 4.83), and negative relationships in the ventral pallidum (peak t = -3.99) and ventral tegmental area (peak t = -4.03). AN participants also exhibited negative relationships between cardiac sensations and activation in response to highly palatable foods in the putamen (peak t = -3.41) and ventromedial prefrontal cortex (peak t = -3.61). Healthy participants exhibited the opposite pattern in all of these regions. CONCLUSIONS: Hedonic and interoceptive inferences made by individuals with AN at the sight of food may be influenced by atypical visceral interoceptive experience, which could contribute to restrictive eating.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".