Understanding interoceptive modeling and categorization following early-life adversity

Interoception – the process by which the nervous system senses, perceives, and models the internal state of the body – is suggested to be a transdiagnostic mechanism in both mental and physical health disorders. It is an inherently multidimensional and complex construct, which poses both conceptual and measurement challenges. This complexity is illustrated by a recurrent debate in the field, which concerns whether “more” interoception is inherently beneficial for health.

We argue that this tension arises from ambiguity between two distinct constructs of interoception, which we label: interoceptive modeling and interoceptive categorization. We define interoceptive modeling as the underlying process via which the nervous system predicts and tracks sensory information from the periphery to generate a model of the current or future state of the body. In contrast, interoceptive categorization refers to the categorization and interpretation of interoceptive information.

These are not independent processes, but a conceptual distinction which highlights underlying differences in variation of interoception. Clarifying this distinction reveals that health risks are more likely to stem from poor interoceptive modeling and/or maladaptive interoceptive categorization, rather than from an excess of interoception broadly (i.e., better modelling is always beneficial for mental and physical health). We illustrate this framework using the example of early-life adversity, proposing that features of early-life environments can shape both modeling and categorization processes in ways that confer vulnerability to later mental and physical health challenges.

By disentangling these interrelated constructs, this framework advances conceptual clarity in the field, with important implications for theory, measurement, and intervention. Savoca was supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program under Grant No. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA, US Paul W. Callaghan The authors declare no competing interests. Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material.