↓ Skip to main content

Correlations between social-emotional feelings and anterior insula activity are independent from visceral states but influenced by culture

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
38 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
169 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Correlations between social-emotional feelings and anterior insula activity are independent from visceral states but influenced by culture
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, September 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00728
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mary Helen Immordino-Yang, Xiao-Fei Yang, Hanna Damasio

Abstract

The anterior insula (AI) maps visceral states and is active during emotional experiences, a functional confluence that is central to neurobiological accounts of feelings. Yet, it is unclear how AI activity correlates with feelings during social emotions, and whether this correlation may be influenced by culture, as studies correlating real-time AI activity with visceral states and feelings have focused on Western subjects feeling physical pain or basic disgust. Given psychological evidence that social-emotional feelings are cognitively constructed within cultural frames, we asked Chinese and American participants to report their feeling strength to admiration and compassion-inducing narratives during fMRI with simultaneous electrocardiogram recording. Trial-by-trial, cardiac arousal and feeling strength correlated with ventral and dorsal AI activity bilaterally but predicted different variance, suggesting that interoception and social-emotional feeling construction are concurrent but dissociable AI functions. Further, although the variance that correlated with cardiac arousal did not show cultural effects, the variance that correlated with feelings did. Feeling strength was especially associated with ventral AI activity (the autonomic modulatory sector) in the Chinese group but with dorsal AI activity (the visceral-somatosensory/cognitive sector) in an American group not of Asian descent. This cultural group difference held after controlling for posterior insula (PI) activity and was replicated. A bi-cultural East-Asian American group showed intermediate results. The findings help elucidate how the AI supports feelings and suggest that previous reports that dorsal AI activation reflects feeling strength are culture related. More broadly, the results suggest that the brain's ability to construct conscious experiences of social emotion is less closely tied to visceral processes than neurobiological models predict and at least partly open to cultural influence and learning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 38 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 169 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Italy 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 162 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 20%
Researcher 22 13%
Student > Master 21 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 12%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Other 37 22%
Unknown 22 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 60 36%
Neuroscience 27 16%
Social Sciences 15 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 5%
Unspecified 7 4%
Other 25 15%
Unknown 26 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 April 2021.
All research outputs
#1,609,216
of 25,182,110 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#747
of 7,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,468
of 231,927 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#35
of 261 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,182,110 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,638 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 231,927 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 261 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.