Social cognition
Can sensing your heartbeat help you handle social rejection?
Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC
People who are better at sensing their own internal bodily cues, like their heartbeat, experience less distress when socially excluded and are more capable of regulating their emotions.
Study at a glance
- Design
- Human experiment — Study 1: heartbeat accuracy then Cyberball inclusion/exclusion; Study 2: interoception–ER questionnaire links
- N
- Study 1 n=69 women; Study 2 n=116 — no single primary N
- Population
- Young adults (Study 1 women only; Study 2 mixed)
- Outcome
- Interoceptive accuracy buffering social-exclusion distress and relating to ER habits
Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.
Key findings
The first study revealed that while being excluded made everyone feel worse, participants with higher body awareness experienced significantly less threat to their psychological needs. These highly body-aware individuals also chose a shorter physical distance from their social partners after exclusion, indicating a stronger drive to reconnect. Additionally, the second study showed that higher body awareness was significantly associated with a greater ability to use both cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression to regulate daily emotions.
Methodology
In the first study, researchers measured how accurately Sixty-nine female participants could count their own heartbeats without taking their pulse. Next, these participants played a virtual ball-tossing game called Cyberball, where they were either included, excluded by other players, or excluded due to a simulated technical failure. Finally, researchers measured their emotional distress and how close they allowed a co-player to stand to them. In a second study, 116 participants, including 27 male individuals, had their heartbeat awareness tested and completed a questionnaire assessing their habitual use of different emotion regulation strategies.
Limitations
One limitation is that the initial study only included female participants, meaning these specific behavioral responses to exclusion cannot be generalized to men. Another limitation is that because both studies used correlational measures for body awareness, they cannot prove that a better ability to sense bodily signals directly causes better emotion regulation. Lastly, the physical distance test occurred in a laboratory setting, which might not perfectly mirror how people seek out or avoid social connection in the real world.
How this study connects
Role on claims
Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.
An individual's baseline capacity for interoception, or awareness of their internal bodily signals, is positively associated with their self-reported habitual use of cognitive reappraisal.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
Higher objective interoceptive accuracy buffers the psychological distress caused by social exclusion and is linked to the effective use of adaptive emotion regulation strategies.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
There is an apparent tension regarding whether objective bodily accuracy directly impacts emotional processing: one study shows that objective heartbeat tracking accuracy buffers social exclusion distress and relates to daily emotion regulation, while another shows that emotional susceptibility is unrelated to objective tracking accuracy and instead relates to subjective attitudes.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
Greater interoceptive awareness, such as the ability to accurately sense one's own heartbeat, is positively associated with a greater capacity to utilize expressive suppression in everyday life.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
Open questions
Tensions this paper is part of
From concept pages' “where studies disagree.” Disagreement means the same question; scope means different assays, populations, or outcomes.
There is an apparent tension regarding whether objective bodily accuracy directly impacts emotional processing: one study shows that objective heartbeat tracking accuracy buffers social exclusion distress and relates to daily emotion regulation, while another shows that emotional susceptibility is unrelated to objective tracking accuracy and instead relates to subjective attitudes.
Related papers in this topic
Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.