Interoceptive Awareness of the Breath Preserves Dorsal Attention Network Activity amidst Widespread Cortical Deactivation: A Within-Participant Neuroimaging Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Interoception, the representation of the body’s internal state, serves as a foundation for emotion, motivation, and wellbeing. Yet despite its centrality in human experience, the neural mechanisms of interoception are poorly understood. The Interoceptive/Exteroceptive Attention Task (IEAT) is a novel neuroimaging paradigm that compares behavioral tracking of the respiratory cycle (Active Interoception) to tracking of a visual stimulus (Active Exteroception). Twenty-two healthy participants completed the IEAT during two separate scanning sessions (N = 44) as part of a randomized control trial of Mindful Awareness in Body-oriented Therapy (MABT). Compared to Exteroception, Interoception deactivated somatomotor and prefrontal regions. Greater interoceptive sensibility (MAIA scale) predicted sparing from deactivation along the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and left-lateralized language regions. The right insula—typically described as a primary interoceptive cortex—was only implicated by its further deactivation during an exogenously paced respiration condition (Active Matching). Psychophysiological interaction analysis characterized Active Interoception as promoting greater ACC connectivity with lateral frontal and parietal regions commonly referred to as the Dorsal Attention Network. Interoception of the breath may therefore involve reduced cortical activity but greater connectivity , with greater sensibility sparing cortical inhibition within well-characterized attentional networks. In contrast to a literature that relates detection of liminal signals such as the heartbeat to anterior insula activity, attention towards accessible body sensations such as the breath may lead to a low activity, high connectivity state in which sensory signals from the body may be better discerned. Significance Statement Interoception, the representation of the body’s internal state, is poorly understood compared to the external senses, with existing neuroimaging studies failing to match task difficulty between interoceptive and exteroceptive tasks. The present study used a novel fMRI task to compare interoceptive and exteroceptive attention, and how this distinction was moderated by self-reported interoceptive awareness. The results implicate three novel interoceptive mechanisms: interoception reduces cortical activity while increasing connectivity , wherein awareness is linked to preserved activation of the brain’s salience network and left-lateralized language regions. These findings characterize interoception as a lower activity state in which awareness depends upon the ability to notice and report on body signals typically obscured by the processing of exteroceptive information and other forms of cognition.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".