Influence of alexithymia severity in the healthy population on the susceptibility to false interoceptive feedback
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alexithymia is a psychological trait characterized by difficulty expressing emotions. Previous studies reported that individuals with higher alexithymia have a decreased sense of interoception, which is the sense of monitoring and controlling internal organs. Thus, we hypothesized that internal organ activity (cardiac activities in the present study) was easily affected by false feedback in individuals with severe alexithymia. Therefore, we investigated whether the effects of fake heart rate feedback on real cardiac activities differ depending on the severity of alexithymia as assessed by the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20). Fake heart rate feedback was presented as if it were occurring in the individual's hand through a virtual reality system at various speeds. Changes in cardiac activities were evaluated by the root-mean-square-successive difference (RMSSD, high value indicates greater parasympathetic tone) of the heartbeat interval. Our findings revealed a negative correlation between externally oriented thinking, a subscale of the TAS-20 score, and the RMSSD change ratio elicited by fake heart rate feedback. These findings indicate that individuals with higher alexithymia might be particularly susceptible to external fake feedback.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".