↓ Skip to main content

Differential changes in self-reported aspects of interoceptive awareness through 3 months of contemplative training

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
458 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
Differential changes in self-reported aspects of interoceptive awareness through 3 months of contemplative training
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01504
Pubmed ID
Authors

Boris Bornemann, Beate M. Herbert, Wolf E. Mehling, Tania Singer

Abstract

Interoceptive body awareness (IA) is crucial for psychological well-being and plays an important role in many contemplative traditions. However, until recently, standardized self-report measures of IA were scarce, not comprehensive, and the effects of interoceptive training on such measures were largely unknown. The Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness (MAIA) questionnaire measures IA with eight different scales. In the current study, we investigated whether and how these different aspects of IA are influenced by a 3-months contemplative intervention in the context of the ReSource project, in which 148 subjects engaged in daily practices of "Body Scan" and "Breath Meditation." We developed a German version of the MAIA and tested it in a large and diverse sample (n = 1,076). Internal consistencies were similar to the English version (0.56-0.89), retest reliability was high (rs: 0.66-0.79), and the MAIA showed good convergent and discriminant validity. Importantly, interoceptive training improved five out of eight aspects of IA, compared to a retest control group. Participants with low IA scores at baseline showed the biggest changes. Whereas practice duration only weakly predicted individual differences in change, self-reported liking of the practices and degree of integration into daily life predicted changes on most scales. Interestingly, the magnitude of observed changes varied across scales. The strongest changes were observed for the regulatory aspects of IA, that is, how the body is used for self-regulation in daily life. No significant changes were observed for the Noticing aspect (becoming aware of bodily changes), which is the aspect that is predominantly assessed in other IA measures. This differential pattern underscores the importance to assess IA multi-dimensionally, particularly when interested in enhancement of IA through contemplative practice or other mind-body interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 458 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 448 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 80 17%
Student > Master 75 16%
Student > Bachelor 54 12%
Researcher 49 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 39 9%
Other 62 14%
Unknown 99 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 212 46%
Neuroscience 36 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 29 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 3%
Arts and Humanities 13 3%
Other 49 11%
Unknown 105 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 17 December 2015.
All research outputs
#5,768,843
of 23,362,684 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,319
of 31,098 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,867
of 355,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#163
of 389 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,362,684 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,098 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 355,352 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 389 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.