Gender differences in interoceptive accuracy and emotional ability: An explanation for incompatible findings.

Most theories of emotion describe a crucial role for interoceptive accuracy, the perception of the body's internal physiological signals, in emotional experience. Despite support for interoceptive accuracy's role in emotion, findings of gender differences in emotional and interoceptive processing are incompatible with theory; women typically show poorer interoceptive accuracy, but women often outperform men on measures of emotional processing and recognition. This suggests a need to re-evaluate the relationship between interoceptive accuracy and emotion considering sex and gender. Here we extend Pennebaker and Roberts' (1992) theory of gender differences in the use of interoceptive signals for emotional experience, proposing that language socialisation may result in gender differences in the propensity to label internal state changes as physiological or emotional, respectively. Despite outstanding questions concerning the fractionation of interoceptive and emotional domains, this theory provides a plausible explanation for seemingly incompatible findings of gender differences in interoceptive and emotional abilities.

Dissociations between self-reported interoceptive accuracy and attention: Evidence from the Interoceptive Attention Scale.

Models of interoception highlight the importance of considering participants' beliefs regarding their interoceptive ability. Research focusing on such beliefs suggests a dissociation between self-reported interoceptive accuracy and attention. However, it remains unclear whether such dissociations are driven by differences in the sensations rated across these questionnaires, or a genuine dissociation between different facets of self-reported interoception. Here we examined the relationship between self-report measures of interoceptive accuracy and attention using a novel measure- the Interoceptive Attention Scale- designed to match the interoceptive sensations included in an existing questionnaire measure of interoceptive accuracy. In addition, we examined whether the interpretation of questionnaire measures of interoception altered associations across measures. Results support the proposed distinction between self-reported interoceptive attention and accuracy and highlight the importance of considering the interpretation of questionnaire measures of interoception. The implications of these findings for theory, future research, and interpretation of existing research are discussed.