↓ Skip to main content

Cross-cultural differences in somatic awareness and interoceptive accuracy: a review of the literature and directions for future research

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, December 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 (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
33 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
100 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
226 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
Cross-cultural differences in somatic awareness and interoceptive accuracy: a review of the literature and directions for future research
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, December 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01379
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christine Ma-Kellams

Abstract

This review examines cross-cultural differences in interoception and the role of culturally bound epistemologies, historical traditions, and contemplative practices to assess four aspects of culture and interoception: (1) the extent to which members from Western and non-Western cultural groups exhibit differential levels of interoceptive accuracy and somatic awareness; (2) the mechanistic origins that can explain these cultural differences, (3) culturally bound behavioral practices that have been empirically shown to affect interoception, and (4) consequences for culturally bound psychopathologies. The following outlines the scope of the scientific review. Part 1 reviews studies on cultural variation in spontaneous somatic word use, linguistic expressions, traditional medical practices, and empirical laboratory studies to assess the evidence for cultural differences in somatic processes. Integration of these findings suggests a startling paradox: on the one hand, non-Western cultures consistently exhibit heightened somatic focus and awareness across a variety of contexts; on the other hand, non-Western cultures also exhibit less interoceptive accuracy in laboratory studies. Part 2 discusses the various mechanistic explanations that have been proposed to explain these cultural differences in somatic awareness and interoceptive accuracy, focusing on cultural schemas and epistemologies. Part 3 addresses the behavioral and contemplative practices that have been proposed as possible "interventions," or methods of cultivating bodily awareness and perceptual accuracy. Finally, Part 4 reviews the consequences of interoception for psychopathology, including somatization, body dysmorphia, eating disorders, and anxiety disorders.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 226 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 2%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 220 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 16%
Student > Master 25 11%
Student > Bachelor 24 11%
Researcher 21 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 9%
Other 41 18%
Unknown 59 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 91 40%
Neuroscience 17 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 3%
Social Sciences 6 3%
Other 19 8%
Unknown 71 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 15 June 2015.
All research outputs
#1,809,257
of 25,994,718 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#3,720
of 34,930 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,461
of 371,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#61
of 363 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,994,718 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 34,930 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 371,353 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 363 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.