Motor imagery (MI) requires the mental representation of the body, obtained by integrating exteroceptive and interoceptive information. This study aimed to investigate the role of interoceptive sensitivity (IS) in MI performed through visual and kinesthetic modalities by participants with low (lows, N = 26; SHSS: A, M + SD: 1.00 + 1.52), medium (mediums, N = 11; SHSS: A, 6.00 + 0.77) and high hypnotizability scores (highs, N = 16; SHSS:A, 9.75 + 1.24), as measured by the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale: Form A. The three groups displayed different MI abilities and IS levels. The efficacy of MI was measured using the chronometric index and self-reported experience, while IS was measured using the Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness (MAIA) questionnaire. Alpha and beta power spectrum densities (PSDs) were extracted from the EEG signals acquired during baseline, actual movement and visually and kinesthetically imagined movements. The chronometric indices do not reveal significant differences between groups and imagery modalities. The self-report MI efficacy indicates better kinesthetic imagery in highs and mediums than in lows, and no modality difference among lows. The MAIA dimensions sustain the differences in subjective experience and almost all the EEG differences. The latter are slightly different in highs, mediums and lows. This is the first report of the major role played by IS in MI and strongly supports the theory of embodied cognition.

Hypnotizability-related differences in interoception may be relevant to emotion regulation. The present study examined the relationships between hypnotizability, interoceptive sensibility (IS) and interoceptive accuracy (IA), and the use of cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression. One hundred and two healthy volunteers, assessed for hypnotizability, completed questionnaires assessing absorption, state anxiety, IS and emotion regulation. A portion of them (N = 62) participated in the heartbeat counting task, measuring IA. IS was positively associated with hypnotizability and cognitive reappraisal and negatively associated with expressive suppression. IA was negatively associated with hypnotizability and cognitive reappraisal and showed no relationship with expressive suppression. Mediation analysis revealed that hypnotizability indirectly positively predicted cognitive reappraisal through both IS and IA. Participants with high and low hypnotizability were more likely to use expressive suppression than participants with medium hypnotizability. Results support the role of interoception and hypnotizability in emotion regulation and may guide new clinical approaches.

The present scoping review reports the reciprocal relations between hypnotizability, interoception, and emotion. Brain morpho-functional differences may account for the lower interoceptive accuracy, higher interoceptive sensitivity, and different emotional strategies observed in highly hypnotizable participants with respect to medium-to-low hypnotizables. Since interoception is relevant to both physical and mental health and hypnotizability can predict both interoceptive abilities and the efficacy of interoception-based mental training, this allows for the development of new forms of treatment and rehabilitation.

Motor imagery requires mental representation of the body, which is obtained by the integration of exteroceptive and interoceptive information. The aim of the study was to investigate the role of interoceptive sensitivity in motor imagery performed through visual and kinesthetic modalities in participants with low (lows, N = 26), medium (mediums, N = 11) and high hypnotizability scores (highs, N = 16), measured by the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale: Form A. These groups display different motor imagery abilities and interoceptive sensitivity. The efficacy of motor imagery was measured by chronometric index and self-reported experience, and interoceptive sensitivity by the Multisensory Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness (MAIA) questionnaire. EEG alpha and beta power spectral densities were extracted from recordings acquired during baseline, actual movement, visually and kinesthetically imagined movements. The chronometric indices did not reveal significant differences among groups and between imagery modalities. In contrast, the self-reported imagery efficacy indicated better kinesthetic imagery in highs and mediums than in lows, and no modality difference among lows. MAIA dimensions sustained the differences in sub-jective experience and almost all the EEG differences, slightly different in highs, mediums and lows. This is the first report of a major role played by interoceptive sensitivity in motor imagery.

Prior research suggests differences in interoceptive processing across hypnotizability levels; however, the validity of previously used measures has been questioned, and how hypnotizability relates to different interoceptive dimensions remains unclear. This study aimed to assess the relationship between hypnotizability and three dimensions of interoception: accuracy (IA), sensibility (IS), and awareness (IAW). Forty-two healthy participants completed a heartbeat counting task (HCT) and a heartbeat discrimination task (HDT) to measure IA. IS was assessed using the Body Perception Questionnaire (BPQ) and mean confidence ratings provided during HCT and HDT. IAW was defined as the correspondence between IA and confidence for HCT and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for HDT. Hypnotizability was measured using the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale: Form A. A time estimation task was introduced to evaluate its role in HCT performance. The results showed a negative association between hypnotizability and performance on both the HCT and the HDT, no significant association between hypnotizability, BPQ, and mean confidence scores, and no significant relationship between hypnotizability and either measure of IAW. No significant associations were observed within or between interoceptive dimensions. HCT scores were strongly associated with time estimation accuracy. The results replicate previous findings of lower IA in highly hypnotizable individuals but indicate that self-reported bodily vigilance and metacognitive awareness of interoceptive abilities are not related to hypnotizability. Our findings align with predictive coding views of hypnotizability, suggesting that lower IA reflects diminished sensory precision, which may facilitate stronger weighting of top-down priors over sensory evidence.