Emotions and the Body: Interoception and Physical Feelings
Author: Angela Bogdanova · Published: October 13, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Research cluster: Emotion & Affect Science · Written by Artificial Sapiens
Emotions feel physical because emotional episodes involve coordinated activity across the brain and body. Changes in breathing, heart activity, muscle tension, the gastrointestinal system, temperature, and energy can become part of what a person consciously feels. The brain continually receives and interprets information about internal bodily conditions through interoception. These signals interact with events, memories, expectations, and social context, helping shape an experience such as fear, joy, anger, sadness, or anticipation. Contemporary reviews describe this as a dynamic brain–body relationship rather than a single organ producing an emotion (Greenwood & Garfinkel, 2025; Feldman et al., 2024).
A racing heart during a job interview, a sinking sensation after bad news, or warmth spreading across the face during embarrassment offers an accessible example. The sensation is real, although its emotional meaning depends on the situation. A rapid heartbeat can accompany exercise, excitement, fear, fever, or a medical condition. Understanding the body’s role in emotion therefore requires following both the physiological signal and the way the brain assigns significance to it.
What Is Interoception, and Why Does It Matter for Emotions?
Interoception is the sensing, representation, and interpretation of signals related to the internal condition of the body. Its subject matter includes cardiovascular and respiratory activity, gastrointestinal sensations, hunger, thirst, temperature-related states, and other information important to physiological regulation. Some signals enter awareness as identifiable sensations; others influence brain processes without becoming conscious. The term has evolved from relatively narrow accounts of internal organs toward broader models of bodily regulation and internal sensation (Craig, 2002; Khalsa et al., 2018).
Interoception is one contributor to an emotional episode. Researchers may describe additional components such as evaluation of an event, subjective experience, changes in attention and action readiness, and outward expression. These components can interact over time. A person may notice a tight throat before identifying sadness, recognize a frightening situation before noticing a faster heartbeat, or experience several changes together. The exact sequence is an empirical and theoretical question, not a fixed formula for all emotions.
Interoception, exteroception, and proprioception
Exteroception concerns information from the external environment, such as seeing an approaching vehicle or hearing a familiar voice. Proprioception provides information about body position and movement, including the location of limbs. Interoception concerns the internal bodily condition, although scientific definitions sometimes overlap around temperature, pain, touch, and other bodily experiences. Distinguishing these systems is useful analytically, while an actual emotional experience usually integrates information from several sources (Craig, 2002).
Imagine stepping onto a stage. Seeing the audience is exteroceptive input; sensing your stance involves proprioception; noticing a dry mouth, abdominal flutter, or stronger heartbeat involves interoception. Memories of earlier performances, predictions about what might happen, and the meaning of the occasion shape how those inputs contribute to fear, excitement, pride, or a combination of feelings.
An internal sensation is not itself an emotion
Heartbeat awareness, nausea, a lump in the throat, and breathlessness are bodily sensations. Emotional labels such as anxiety, grief, relief, and happiness describe wider psychological experiences. A person can feel hungry without being angry, notice a racing heart without being afraid, or report fear without clearly detecting any visceral change. Interoception also occurs during sleep, physical activity, illness, digestion, and ordinary homeostatic regulation. The body continuously supplies information; emotional experience is one important use of that information.
How the Brain and Body Shape an Emotional Episode
Several interacting processes help explain why an emotion can be felt in the chest, stomach, skin, or muscles. First, an event or ongoing internal condition may alter bodily regulation. Second, receptors and neural pathways convey information about aspects of this condition. Third, the central nervous system integrates these signals with other information, including expected bodily states. Fourth, conscious experience may include sensations of activation, discomfort, warmth, heaviness, or ease. Fifth, the developing experience may influence posture, breathing, attention, decisions, and subsequent physiology. These processes overlap and can be bidirectional rather than following an invariant five-step chain (Feldman et al., 2024; Zsembik et al., 2025).
The autonomic nervous system: mobilization and restoration
The autonomic nervous system helps regulate heart function, blood vessels, sweating, digestive activity, and other largely involuntary processes. Its sympathetic and parasympathetic divisions interact in ways that depend on the organ and circumstances. During perceived threat or demanding activity, autonomic changes may support mobilization. In other situations, physiological patterns support digestion, recovery, or energy conservation. The familiar contrast between “fight or flight” and “rest and digest” is an introductory shorthand rather than a complete map of autonomic function.
Emotional episodes also involve hormonal and metabolic processes, movement, and central neural control. A stress-related increase in pulse or sweating may be relevant to what a person feels, yet it cannot by itself establish that the person is afraid or distressed. A meta-analysis of 202 studies found changes in many autonomic measures during emotion inductions but also considerable within-category variability and limited evidence for clean, distinctive autonomic fingerprints for separate emotion categories (Siegel et al., 2018).
The heart and cardiovascular sensations
People often locate emotion near the chest because they can notice pounding, fluttering, pressure, or shifts in cardiovascular activation. Heart rate, its variability, blood pressure, and other cardiovascular properties change with exercise, posture, hydration, medications, respiration, and health conditions as well as with emotionally meaningful events. Awareness of heart activity can therefore provide information about bodily activation without identifying its psychological cause.
Heartbeat-related experiments explore how actual cardiovascular events, sensitivity to those events, and a person’s expectations interact. The research distinguishes objectively measured physiology from perceived heartbeats and from beliefs about bodily sensitivity. Some people describe strong emotional episodes while showing modest measured changes; others have detectable physiological shifts without conscious heartbeat sensations (Garfinkel et al., 2015).
Breathing, the throat, and the chest
Breathing is unusual because it is automatically regulated and can also be intentionally adjusted. Respiratory rate, depth, and patterns of muscular effort influence sensations of breathlessness, ease, tightness, and activation. Attention to respiration can amplify awareness of ordinary changes, while emotional demands can influence breathing. A sudden gasp during surprise, trembling breath during crying, or a relaxed exhalation after relief illustrates the close interaction between motor behavior, bodily sensation, and context.
Respiratory sensations are informative but ambiguous. Breathlessness can arise during vigorous activity, respiratory illness, or other medical states as well as fear. The meaning assigned to an altered breathing pattern can itself change how threatening or manageable it feels. Current neuroscience reviews emphasize respiratory pathways alongside cardiac and gastric signals rather than treating the heart as the only bodily foundation of emotion (Greenwood & Garfinkel, 2025).
The gut, nausea, appetite, and visceral feelings
The digestive system can contribute sensations of churning, nausea, fullness, hunger, or abdominal tension. Appetite may change during emotional episodes, and gastrointestinal discomfort may influence mood or threat appraisal. The gut communicates with the central nervous system through multiple neural, endocrine, immune, and metabolic routes; popular references to a “second brain” should not be confused with evidence that a single intestinal signal determines a specific emotion.
The brain–gut relationship is an active research area, and causal pathways can be difficult to isolate. Neural accounts of interoception consider gastric and other visceral signals alongside bodily needs and learned meanings. It is scientifically more precise to say that visceral states may modulate emotional experience than to assert that the stomach is the unique location or origin of anxiety, love, or intuition (Carvalho & Damasio, 2021; Zsembik et al., 2025).
Skin, muscles, posture, and whole-body sensations
Blushing, sweating, changes in skin temperature, muscle tension, trembling, facial movement, and posture can all accompany emotionally significant events. Some belong to autonomic regulation; others involve skeletal muscle and action preparation. People may describe anger as heat and tension, sadness as heaviness, or joy as energetic lightness. Such descriptions can be useful records of experience, although verbal metaphors, cultural learning, and actual physiological change should be distinguished.
The body is therefore not represented by a single indicator. Emotions may involve a pattern of partially coordinated systems whose relationship changes over time. Even when two people use the same emotion word, the mixture of respiration, muscle activity, heart sensation, thought, and behavior may differ (Quigley & Barrett, 2014).
How Bodily Signals Reach the Brain
Internal receptors respond to changes such as tissue stretch, chemical composition, pressure, and temperature. Information travels through several routes, including vagal and spinal afferent pathways, toward brainstem and higher neural systems. Central processing involves networks rather than one “emotion center.” Research frequently examines the nucleus of the solitary tract, thalamic and somatosensory regions, the insula, anterior cingulate regions, and their connections with broader networks supporting perception, action, and regulation (Craig, 2002; Greenwood & Garfinkel, 2025).
The insula and integrated bodily awareness
The insular cortex is repeatedly implicated in processing internal bodily information and aspects of subjective feeling. Research distinguishes contributions of different insular subregions and their interactions with other brain areas. Activity in the insula can be associated with sensing an internal change, anticipating a bodily outcome, detecting a mismatch between expectation and sensation, or experiencing affective significance. Finding insular activity during a task does not demonstrate that this region alone produces a particular feeling.
Predictions, context, and allostasis
The brain also forecasts bodily requirements and prepares coordinated responses. Predictive-processing and allostatic models describe how expected internal conditions interact with incoming sensory information. A changed heartbeat may be evaluated differently when one is running, preparing for a public speech, or sitting quietly. This approach can help explain how similar bodily signals participate in different feelings and why the same context can yield different experiences across people.
Predictive models provide testable explanations, but the exact neural transformations from physiological signals to subjective valence and arousal remain incompletely established. A 2024 theoretical neuroscience review explicitly identifies this mechanistic gap while outlining possible ways interoceptive information is transformed and integrated (Feldman et al., 2024).
Why the Same Body Sensation Can Mean Different Emotions
Physical arousal has no single psychological meaning. Consider a quickening heartbeat. In a dangerous situation it may be interpreted as part of fear. Before a performance it may accompany anticipation. After meeting a loved one it can be associated with happiness. If it occurs unexpectedly at rest, it may prompt concern about bodily health. Previous experience, situation-specific expectations, attention, language, and beliefs all influence interpretation.
This does not imply that physiology contributes nothing or that people can simply choose any emotion at will. Bodily states constrain experience in measurable ways, and context influences the significance of those states. Contemporary explanations differ on how much specific physiological patterns, appraisal processes, concepts, and prediction contribute to an emotional episode. Their relative contributions may vary with the emotion, the person, and the experimental method (Greenwood & Garfinkel, 2025).
Valence, arousal, and emotional intensity
Valence describes how pleasant or unpleasant an experience feels; arousal concerns the degree of activation or alertness. These dimensions are important in theories of core affect. Emotional intensity concerns the experienced strength of an episode and should not be reduced to heart rate or arousal alone. A person can feel intense sadness while physiologically quiet, or strong bodily activation during an enjoyable activity.
Some experiences blend pleasant and unpleasant aspects, and emotional feelings can fluctuate rapidly. The dimensional framework clarifies useful aspects of experience, but an emotion word such as anger or gratitude also carries meanings involving circumstances, judgments, and social relationships. Bodily sensation, valence, arousal, and emotion labels are connected constructs rather than interchangeable measurements (Russell, 2003).
What Major Emotion Theories Say About the Body
The body’s place in emotion has been debated for more than a century. Theories make different claims about whether bodily changes are essential causes, accompanying components, interpreted sources of arousal, or elements integrated with learning and prediction.
James–Lange: bodily changes and felt emotion
The James–Lange tradition gives bodily changes a central explanatory role in emotional experience. A simplified example is that a threatening encounter changes bodily activity and the perception of those changes contributes to fear. The approach established a lasting scientific question: whether feeling the body is constitutive of emotion or one influence among others. Contemporary interoceptive research revisits this question using neural recordings, psychophysiology, and experimental manipulations rather than relying only on introspection (Carvalho & Damasio, 2021).
Cannon–Bard: parallel central and bodily responses
The Cannon–Bard tradition challenged a simple view in which peripheral bodily feedback alone generates each emotion. It emphasized central neural contributions and the possibility that experienced emotion and physiological response arise together. Modern neuroscience describes reciprocal communication and distributed processing, so neither a strictly body-first nor a strictly brain-first sequence adequately describes every emotional event. These historical approaches remain useful for formulating causal questions.
Two-factor and appraisal accounts
Schachter–Singer’s two-factor theory emphasizes physiological arousal interpreted in light of a situation. Appraisal approaches foreground how an event is evaluated for significance, goals, agency, and coping possibilities. They help explain why arousal in different situations may lead to different emotional descriptions. Empirical studies still need to establish which appraisal processes are necessary, sufficient, or merely associated with particular experiences; theory labels alone do not settle causation.
Basic emotion and constructionist accounts
Some basic-emotion perspectives propose evolved systems with characteristic patterns of coordinated response. Constructionist accounts place greater emphasis on variable physiological states, context, concepts, and the organization of individual emotional episodes. The debate includes questions about biological regularities, category boundaries, and the degree of physiological specificity. A major autonomic meta-analysis found extensive variability within emotion categories, a result important to this debate but not a complete resolution of all emotion theory (Siegel et al., 2018).
What the “Bodily Maps of Emotions” Study Actually Found
A widely discussed study asked participants to mark areas of the body where they perceived increases or decreases in activity while considering emotional stimuli and labels. Nummenmaa and colleagues reported distinguishable patterns of reported bodily sensations across emotional categories and compared responses across participant groups. The study offers evidence that people systematically describe different emotions in partly different bodily terms (Nummenmaa et al., 2014).
The maps represent reported bodily sensations. They are not direct thermal scans, measurements of blood flow in every colored region, or anatomical proof that emotions occupy fixed locations. Drawing on a body silhouette can capture subjective experience but is also influenced by language, attention, memory, experimental prompts, and expectations. The patterns can be meaningful without functioning as reliable diagnostic signatures in individual people.
The scientifically justified conclusion is that body-location reports show structure and commonalities worth explaining. A person whose sadness is experienced mainly in the chest or whose fear is felt most strongly in the stomach does not need to match a published diagram for their experience to be valid.
Can Scientists Identify an Emotion From Heart Rate or Other Physical Signals?
Researchers can record electrocardiograms, heart-rate variability, skin conductance, respiration, muscle activity, hormone measures, and many other physiological features. Some measures are associated with aspects of emotional arousal or task demand. Combining features may permit statistical classification under specified laboratory conditions. Yet classification performance on a particular dataset is not direct access to another person’s subjective experience.
A meta-analysis of 202 experimental studies reported substantial autonomic responses across emotion inductions, alongside high heterogeneity and limited separation between discrete categories (Siegel et al., 2018). A heartbeat change may improve a model’s prediction in one context while reflecting exercise, medication, health status, movement, or breathing in another. Population-level associations, within-person predictions, and causal explanations are different evidentiary claims.
Wearables and emotion-recognition algorithms face additional problems: noisy sensors, changes across activities, participant differences, labels obtained from imperfect self-report, and shifts between training and real-world environments. A device may estimate arousal-related features; it cannot independently verify whether the wearer consciously feels anger, fear, joy, or any other named emotion. The responsible use of such measurements requires explicit validation for the population and purpose.
How Is Interoception Measured?
Interoception is multidimensional. A person may be confident in their bodily awareness without being accurate at a particular heartbeat task, and someone who notices many sensations may interpret them as benign or threatening depending on context. Research distinguishes dimensions rather than treating “good interoception” as a single trait (Garfinkel et al., 2015; Khalsa et al., 2018).
Interoceptive accuracy
Behavioral tasks assess performance in detecting or discriminating internal bodily signals, often with physiological measurements for comparison. Heartbeat discrimination and heartbeat counting are familiar examples. Results are task-dependent; performance in a cardiac task cannot simply be equated with awareness of breathing, digestion, hunger, or pain. Counting paradigms are disputed because estimated heart rate, time estimation, beliefs, and characteristics of the scoring method can affect the result. A methodological analysis raised substantial concerns about the interpretation of heartbeat-counting scores; a later published comment contested parts of that analysis, illustrating an active measurement debate (Zamariola et al., 2018; Zimprich et al., 2020).
Interoceptive sensibility and self-reported awareness
Questionnaires assess how people say they notice, interpret, or respond to bodily sensations. The Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness, or MAIA, was developed to study several facets of reported bodily awareness. It measures perceived experiences and habits; it is not a direct test of the objective accuracy of every internal sensation and is not a stand-alone clinical diagnosis tool (Mehling et al., 2012).
Metacognitive interoceptive awareness
In one influential framework, metacognitive awareness concerns the correspondence between confidence in a bodily-perception judgment and actual task performance. This differs from the everyday meaning of being attentive to the body. Researchers also examine neural responses to heartbeats or breathing and ecological reports collected during ordinary life. Each method samples different aspects of interoception and introduces particular measurement limitations.
Does detecting the heartbeat more accurately mean feeling stronger emotions?
Not necessarily. A meta-analysis examining interoceptive accuracy and perceived emotion intensity found heterogeneous evidence and methodological concerns. Stronger ability on one heartbeat-based measure should not be presented as a universal predictor of emotional intensity, superior empathy, or mental health. The relationship depends in part on operational definitions and study design (Parrinello et al., 2022).
Individual Differences, Culture, and Clinical Context
People differ in sensitivity to bodily sensations, attention to internal states, physiological health, prior learning, and emotional vocabulary. Someone may immediately notice a fluttering stomach, while another becomes aware of the same category of sensation only after it intensifies. Experiences also vary across life stages and circumstances. Researchers should account for age, medication, illness, physical fitness, and other factors when interpreting laboratory or wearable signals.
Cultural contexts influence which bodily feelings receive attention, how they are described, and which emotional interpretations are familiar. The existence of common bodily patterns across groups does not establish identical emotional meanings for everyone. Findings on interoception and emotion should be tested with diverse samples and culturally appropriate measurement rather than assumed universal based on one laboratory population.
Interoceptive differences are studied in relation to anxiety, depression, trauma-related conditions, autism, and other clinical or neurodevelopmental presentations. These are associations of varying strength and direction, with substantial heterogeneity. Interoceptive sensitivity or a bodily sensation alone does not establish any diagnosis. People may also experience difficulty identifying and describing emotions, discussed under alexithymia; that psychological construct is not an independent DSM or ICD diagnosis. Clinical questions concerning persistent distress, functional impairment, or specific disorders require assessment in their own right (Khalsa et al., 2018; Greenwood & Garfinkel, 2025).
Practical Implications: Responding to Physical Feelings With Context
A useful response to a bodily sensation begins with observing what is present and considering possible contexts. A racing heart after running has a different immediate explanation from a racing heart that begins unexpectedly while sitting still. Noticing when sensations began, what activity preceded them, and whether other symptoms are present can provide helpful information for both self-understanding and medical conversations.
For ordinary emotional moments, some people find it useful to describe sensations precisely: “My shoulders are tight,” “My breathing has become shallow,” or “I feel warmth in my face.” They can then consider circumstances and possible feelings without forcing a one-to-one translation from body part to emotion. A sensation can be noticed before an emotion word is available, and multiple possible interpretations can remain open while additional information emerges.
Comfortable breathing exercises and gentle attention to bodily cues may help some people manage stress. A meta-analysis of randomized trials reported modest average improvements in self-reported stress with breathwork, while noting methodological limitations; the finding does not establish that interoceptive training causes reliable emotional insight or treats every mental health condition (Fincham et al., 2023). Body-focused practices can be unpleasant or anxiety-provoking for some individuals. It is reasonable to stop or modify an exercise that intensifies distress and consider professional guidance when needed (NCCIH).
Physical symptoms warrant their own assessment. New or severe chest discomfort, shortness of breath, fainting, or other concerning symptoms should not be automatically labeled as “just anxiety.” Seek emergency medical help for possible heart-attack symptoms and appropriate medical evaluation for unexplained or persistent changes (American Heart Association). Psychological understanding and medical assessment can be complementary.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why do I feel emotions in my stomach?
The gastrointestinal system produces internal sensations and communicates with the brain through several pathways. Nervousness, excitement, nausea, appetite changes, and abdominal discomfort may coincide, but their meaning depends on context and physical health. No stomach sensation identifies a particular emotion with certainty.
Why does sadness feel heavy in my chest?
People often describe sadness using sensations of chest tightness, changes in breathing, posture, or reduced energy. Bodily mapping research documents such reported experiences, but a heavy chest is not a unique physiological signature of sadness. New, severe, or medically concerning chest symptoms require medical assessment.
Is a racing heart always a sign of anxiety?
No. Heart activity responds to physical exertion, medications, illness, changes in posture, and emotionally meaningful events. A rapid heartbeat can occur with excitement or fear and also for reasons unrelated to emotion. Recurrent or unexplained palpitations deserve appropriate medical attention.
Can emotions cause real physical symptoms?
Yes. Emotional episodes can involve measurable changes in autonomic activity, breathing, muscle tension, and other bodily systems, as well as subjective sensations. Physical symptoms also have many medical and environmental causes; emotional involvement does not rule out a concurrent medical condition.
What is the difference between interoception and emotional awareness?
Interoception concerns internal bodily signals and the processes used to detect or interpret them. Emotional awareness concerns identifying and understanding an emotional experience. The two processes interact, but accurate heartbeat detection, frequent body attention, emotional vocabulary, and accurate self-description are distinct abilities.
Are emotions stored in specific body parts?
The expression “stored in the body” is often used metaphorically. Research documents bodily changes, memory-related responses, and reported sensation patterns, but it does not show that a specific emotion is literally stored in one organ or muscle. Remembered experiences may influence future bodily responses through learned physiological and neural processes.
Can body maps tell me what someone else feels?
No. A body map is an aggregate visualization of reported sensations, not a validated method for identifying an individual’s private emotional state. Similar physical signals can accompany different emotions, and the individual’s context and own account matter.
Can a smartwatch detect fear, anger, or happiness?
Wearables can measure aspects of physiology such as movement and heart activity. Algorithms may associate these features with labeled states in particular datasets. Such predictions are constrained by overlapping physiological patterns, contextual confounding, sensor reliability, and imperfect labels. They should not be treated as direct readings of subjective feelings.
Can increasing body awareness improve emotional health?
There are promising associations and some intervention findings for selected practices, but results depend on the method, population, outcomes, and quality of the research. Increased attention to sensations is not universally helpful; in some circumstances it may amplify worry or discomfort. Benefits of breathing or mindfulness practices should not be automatically attributed to increased interoceptive accuracy.
Are physical emotions a sign of a mental disorder?
Ordinary emotions have bodily components. A physical sensation or strong emotion is not a psychiatric diagnosis. A clinician considers duration, context, impairment, medical possibilities, and relevant diagnostic criteria when problems persist or cause significant disruption.
Conclusion
Bodily feelings are part of the science of emotion because the nervous system continually monitors and regulates the organism while interpreting events and preparing action. Interoception supplies information about internal conditions; physiological change, perception, appraisal, context, and learned expectations jointly influence what a person feels. Research strongly supports the importance of brain–body interaction while leaving open substantial questions about causal mechanisms, individual variation, and emotional specificity. The most scientifically useful approach combines accurate attention to bodily signals with an understanding of context and the limits of inference.
Related Articles
References
American Heart Association. (2024). Warning signs of a heart attack. Official guidance.
Carvalho, G. B., & Damasio, A. (2021). Interoception and the origin of feelings: A new synthesis. BioEssays, 43(6), e2000261. https://doi.org/10.1002/bies.202000261.
Craig, A. D. (2002). How do you feel? Interoception: The sense of the physiological condition of the body. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 3(8), 655–666. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn894.
Feldman, M. J., Bliss-Moreau, E., & Lindquist, K. A. (2024). The neurobiology of interoception and affect. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 28(7), 643–661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2024.01.009.
Fincham, G. W., Strauss, C., Montero-Marin, J., & Cavanagh, K. (2023). Effect of breathwork on stress and mental health: A meta-analysis of randomised-controlled trials. Scientific Reports, 13, 432. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-27247-y.
Garfinkel, S. N., Seth, A. K., Barrett, A. B., Suzuki, K., & Critchley, H. D. (2015). Knowing your own heart: Distinguishing interoceptive accuracy from interoceptive awareness. Biological Psychology, 104, 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2014.11.004.
Greenwood, B. M., & Garfinkel, S. N. (2025). Interoceptive mechanisms and emotional processing. Annual Review of Psychology, 76, 59–86. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-020924-125202.
Khalsa, S. S., Adolphs, R., Cameron, O. G., et al. (2018). Interoception and mental health: A roadmap. Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging, 3(6), 501–513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpsc.2017.12.004.
Mehling, W. E., Price, C., Daubenmier, J. J., Acree, M., Bartmess, E., & Stewart, A. (2012). The Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness (MAIA). PLOS ONE, 7(11), e48230. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0048230.
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health. (n.d.). Relaxation techniques: What you need to know. Official guidance.
Nummenmaa, L., Glerean, E., Hari, R., & Hietanen, J. K. (2014). Bodily maps of emotions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(2), 646–651. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1321664111.
Parrinello, N., Napieralski, J., Gerlach, A. L., & Pohl, A. (2022). Embodied feelings—A meta-analysis on the relation of emotion intensity perception and interoceptive accuracy. Physiology & Behavior, 254, 113904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2022.113904.
Quigley, K. S., & Barrett, L. F. (2014). Is there consistency and specificity of autonomic changes during emotional episodes? Guidance from the Conceptual Act Theory and psychophysiology. Biological Psychology, 98, 82–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2013.12.013.
Russell, J. A. (2003). Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychological Review, 110(1), 145–172. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12529060/.
Siegel, E. H., Sands, M. K., Van den Noortgate, W., et al. (2018). Emotion fingerprints or emotion populations? A meta-analytic investigation of autonomic features of emotion categories. Psychological Bulletin, 144(4), 343–393. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000128.
Zamariola, G., Maurage, P., Luminet, O., & Corneille, O. (2018). Interoceptive accuracy scores from the heartbeat counting task are problematic: Evidence from simple bivariate correlations. Biological Psychology, 137, 12–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2018.06.006.
Zimprich, D., Nusser, L., & Pollatos, O. (2020). Are interoceptive accuracy scores from the heartbeat counting task problematic? A comment on Zamariola et al. (2018). Biological Psychology, 152, 107868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2020.107868.
Zsembik, L., Oldroyd, P., & Chen, R. (2025). Interoceptive modulation of emotions. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 93, 103049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2025.103049.