Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
48 lines (36 loc) · 3.05 KB

README.md

File metadata and controls

48 lines (36 loc) · 3.05 KB

InteroceptionHEP

Heartbeat Evoked Potentials (HEP) as an Implicit measure of Interoception: Evidence using low-cost EEG Systems

Aims

The aim is threefold:

  • Investigate the reliability of HEPs recorded with low-cost EEG system
  • Get HEP indices under minimal EEG preprocessing to provide "baseline" data and increase clarity
  • Correlate HEP data with interoceptive indices

Literature

General:

  • HEP is objective marker of altered bodily awareness (Terhaar, et al., 2012)
  • Systole is associated with low perceptual sensitivity and leads to longer touch in tactile grating orientation task: duration of touch depends on timing in cardiac cycle. Touches initiated in systole were held longer; touches in diastole shorter. In control condition, no such effect. (Galvez-Pol, et al., 2022)
  • HEP higher during interoception than during exteroception (Petzschner, et al., 2018)
  • Good heartbeat perceivers had a higher effect of attention state on HEP than bad heartbeat perceivers (Yuan, et al., 2007)
  • Focus on heart moderate and significant influence on HEP amplitude (Col, et al., 2021)
  • Changes in arousal have effect on HEP amplitude (Col, et al., 2021)
  • shift in perceptual sensitivity depending on cardiac cycle (stimuli loaclised less frquently during systole)(Al, et al., 2020) "This perceptual attenuation was accompanied by the suppression of only late SEP components (P300) and was stronger for individuals with a more stable heart rate."
  • HEP might reflect shifts between intero- and exteroception, or general shifts in attention
  • Cardiac cycle influences sense of agency (Herman, & Taskiris, 2020)
  • higher interoceptive accuracy was negatively correlated with timing control in tapping task, in the slow tempo condition only (Tomyta, et al., 2022)

Depression and emotions:

  • Emotions can change HEP (Couto, et al., 2015)
  • HEP reduced in depressed patients (Terhaar, et al., 2012)

Decision Making:

  • Better interoception (ie heart beat perception) = better decision making (Werner, et al., 2009)
  • more risky decisions in systole compared to diastole (Kimura, et al., 2023)

Methods:

  • Most effect of HEP measured in central and fronto-central electrodes (Col, et al., 2021)

Analysis:

  • No consensus on analysis (or methods) as shown in meta-analysis [but most studies use ICA] (Col, et al., 2021)
  • global field power (GFP) analysis (Teraahr, et al., 2012)
  • signal detection theory analysis (Al, et al., 2020)
  • no consensus on time window to elimintate influence of cardiac field artifacts (CFA) on data [200-55ms post r-peak as start] (Col, et al., 2021)
  • circular statistics good tool to analyse cardiac phase images (Houston, & Craig,)
  • Heartbeat-related spectral perturbation of electroencephalogram reflects dynamic interoceptive attention states in the trial-by-trial classification analysis (Lee et al., 2024)
    • Our study introduces trial-by-trial analysis of Heartbeat-Related Spectral Perturbation (HRSP)