Somatosensory false feedback biases emotional ratings through interoceptive embodiment.
Joel Patchitt, Sarah Garfinkel, William H Strawson, Mark Miller, Manos Tsakiris, Andy Clark, Hugo D Critchley
Scientific reports April 3, 2025 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-94971-6 via PubMed
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractFalse physiological feedback—mismatches between perceived and actual bodily signals—can bias how people judge the emotional intensity of faces. Prior work using auditory feedback suggested that perceived changes in heart rate increase intensity ratings regardless of whether the feedback indicates a faster or slower heart rate, with the right anterior insula acting as a mismatch detector. This study used pulsatile somatosensory stimulation (vibration) at rates above, below, or matching participants' heart rate, or no stimulation, while they rated emotional faces during brain scanning. Feedback produced a bidirectional effect: intensity ratings increased over each 20-second stimulation block.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Experimental, functional magnetic resonance neuroimaging Randomized Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Interventions | pulsatile somatosensory stimulation at rates higher than HR lower than HR equivalent to HR or no stimulation |
| Duration | 20 s stimulation blocks |
| Keywords | Emotion recognition False physiological feedback Insula Interoception Perception |
| Citations | 4 |
| Key finding | Pulsatile somatosensory false feedback exerted a bidirectional effect on emotional intensity ratings of faces, increasing over each stimulation block, and engaged right insula and socio-emotional processing regions when contrasting higher versus lower heart rate feedback. |
Abstract
Mismatches between perceived and veridical physiological signals during false feedback (FFB) can bias emotional judgements. Paradigms using auditory FFB suggest perceived changes in heart rate (HR) increase ratings of emotional intensity irrespective of feedback type (increased or decreased HR), implicating right anterior insula as a mismatch comparator between exteroceptive and interoceptive information. However, few paradigms have examined effects of somatosensory FFB. Participants rated the emotional intensity of randomized facial expressions while they received 20 s blocks of pulsatile somatosensory stimulation at rates higher than HR, lower than HR, equivalent to HR, or no stimulation during a functional magnetic resonance neuroimaging scan. FFB exerted a bidirectional effect on reported intensity ratings of the emotional faces, increasing over the course of each 20 s stimulation block. Neuroimaging showed FFB engaging regions indicative of affective touch processing, embodiment, and reflex suppression. Contrasting higher vs. lower HR FFB revealed engagement of right insula and centres supporting socio-emotional processing. Results indicate that exposure to pulsatile somatosensory stimulation can influence emotional judgements though its progressive embodiment as a perceived interoceptive arousal state, biasing how affective salience is ascribed to external stimuli. Results are consistent with multimodal integration of priors and prediction-error signalling in shaping perceptual judgments.