We are taught that we have five senses, all of them pointing outward. The sense that matters most for performance is not among them.
Interoception is the perception of the body’s internal state: heartbeat, breath, muscular tension, gut sensation, temperature, the whole continuous stream of information the body generates about itself. It runs constantly, mostly below awareness. And it turns out to be foundational — not only to how we perform, but to how we feel, decide, and recover.
Sign up here to receive future blogs, insights, and updates from us.
What interoception is
The modern account begins with Craig (2002, 2009), who traced a distinct neural pathway carrying information about the physiological condition of the body’s tissues up to the insular cortex. In the insula this information is progressively integrated, and in the anterior insula it becomes available as subjective feeling — the sense of how you are.
Critchley and colleagues (2004) demonstrated the link directly: people better at detecting their own heartbeats showed greater activity and grey matter volume in the right anterior insula, and scored higher on measures of emotional awareness. The body’s internal signals and the felt sense of emotion are not two systems. They are one system, read at different levels of integration.
Barrett and Simmons (2015) added the crucial refinement. The brain does not passively receive bodily signals; it continuously predicts them and compares prediction against input. What we experience as a feeling is substantially the brain’s best model of the body’s state — which explains both why interoception can be systematically wrong, and why it can be retrained.
Three different things people mean by it
A distinction worth holding, because it resolves a lot of confusion. Garfinkel and colleagues (2015) showed that interoception has at least three separable dimensions.
Accuracy — objective performance on detecting internal signals, such as counting your own heartbeats.
Sensibility — your subjective belief about how well you can do this.
Awareness — the correspondence between the two, that is, whether your confidence tracks your actual accuracy.
These come apart routinely, and the gaps are clinically informative. Performers frequently present with high sensibility and poor accuracy: enormous confidence in their body awareness, combined with a genuine inability to detect what is happening in it. Decades of training attention outward — onto the sound, the score, the opponent, the result — will do that.
Why interoception matters for performance
Three reasons.
It is the substrate of regulation. You cannot regulate a state you cannot detect. The performer who notices activation early has options; the one who notices only at the point of overwhelm does not. Almost everything useful in nervous system regulation depends on this sensing capacity being intact.
It carries the information technique cannot. Fine motor skill runs on continuous internal feedback operating far faster than conscious thought. A player who has lost interoceptive contact is flying on instruments that have been switched off, substituting visual and conceptual control for felt information — which is slower, cruder, and precisely the mechanism by which fluency degrades.
It is a condition of flow. Flow depends on an accurate, moment-to-moment read of the challenge–skill balance, and that read is interoceptive before it is cognitive. It is what tells you the tempo is right, the phrase is landing, the movement is available.
Why performers lose it
Rarely by accident. It is generally trained out, by three overlapping routes.
Systematic override. Push through the pain. Ignore the fatigue. Keep going. Performers and athletes are selected and rewarded for the capacity to override bodily signals, and repeated override degrades the signal itself — a nervous system that learns its reports are consistently ignored eventually stops reporting clearly.
Externalised authority. In the pedagogical culture I call the Oppression Model, the measure of right and wrong sits entirely outside the person. Learning is organised around outcome rather than around process and interoceptive feeling. Over years, this teaches a specific lesson: your own felt sense of what is happening is not evidence. Ask the teacher, the coach, the recording, the panel.
Protective dissociation. Where the body has become a source of distress — through injury, chronic anxiety, or the experience of a movement betraying you — a degree of disconnection is protective. It is also, unfortunately, the precise mechanism by which the difficulty is maintained.
This last point deserves emphasis for anyone working with focal dystonia. A characteristic feature is dissociation from the affected area alongside reduced interoceptive sensitivity generally. People describe the hand as not feeling like theirs, or the embouchure as numb, absent, unreachable. The body part most needing accurate internal information has become the one least available to it.
Why it matters for recovery
If interoception is the substrate of regulation, then rebuilding it is not preparation for the work. It is the work.
It is trainable — this is well supported. Contemplative and body-based practices reliably alter interoceptive processing (Farb et al., 2015), and interoception is now a substantial target across clinical populations (Khalsa et al., 2018).
In practice, rebuilding proceeds through capacity rather than through effort, and the sequencing matters. You begin where sensation is neutral or pleasant rather than where the problem is — the affected hand is usually the last place to go, not the first. You work at the edge of tolerance rather than beyond it. And there are ways to extend that edge: attention can be divided, with part of the system anchored somewhere that feels resourced while attention rests on something less comfortable. Held that way, people can stay present with sensations that would otherwise be intolerable, and the window itself gradually widens.
That gradual widening is the mechanism. Not exposure by force, but the progressive expansion of what the nervous system can register without needing to defend itself.
What this means for practitioners
Three implications worth carrying.
First, assess it rather than assuming it. Ask a performer how well they know their body and most will say very well; they have spent their lives training it. That answer is about sensibility, not accuracy, and the two frequently diverge.
Second, expect the deficit to be structural rather than incidental. It was built by years of training that rewarded override. It is not a personal failing and it will not resolve through instruction.
Third, your own interoception is the instrument. You are tracking a client’s state partly through what happens in your own body in their presence. A practitioner out of contact with their own internal signals loses most of the available information.
The wider point
Interoception is not a technique or a preliminary exercise. It is the channel through which a nervous system knows its own condition — and therefore the channel through which anything about that condition can change.
For performers, it is the difference between controlling a body and inhabiting one. For people recovering from focal dystonia, it is the route by which a hand or an embouchure that has become foreign gradually becomes theirs again. And for practitioners, it is the sense through which we do most of what we do, whether or not we have ever named it.
Ruth works with performers, athletes, and therapists across all of these areas. You can explore the full range of her work at ruthslchiles.com/work-with-ruth.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is interoception?
Interoception is the perception of the body’s internal state — heartbeat, breath, muscle tension, gut sensation, temperature. Signals travel to the insular cortex, where they are progressively integrated and, in the anterior insula, become available as subjective feeling.
Why is interoception important for performance?
It is the substrate of nervous system regulation, since you cannot regulate a state you cannot detect. It carries the fast internal feedback that fine motor skill depends on. And it provides the moment-to-moment read of challenge against skill that access to flow requires.
Can interoception be improved?
Yes. Contemplative and body-based practices reliably alter interoceptive processing, and interoception is now a substantial target of intervention across clinical populations. Rebuilding generally proceeds gradually, beginning where sensation is neutral or pleasant rather than at the site of the problem.
What is the difference between interoception and proprioception?
Proprioception is the sense of the body’s position and movement in space — where your limbs are. Interoception is the sense of the body’s internal physiological condition — heartbeat, breath, tension, gut state. Both are non-classical senses, but they carry different information.
Why do performers lose interoceptive awareness?
Generally through three routes: systematic override of bodily signals in training, which degrades the signal itself; externalised authority, where the measure of correctness sits outside the person; and protective dissociation where the body has become a source of distress.
How does interoception relate to focal dystonia?
Dissociation from the affected area alongside reduced interoceptive sensitivity generally is a characteristic feature. People describe the hand or embouchure as numb, absent, or not theirs. Rebuilding interoceptive contact is central to recovery rather than preparatory to it.
Is interoception the same as mindfulness?
No, though they are related. Interoception is a perceptual capacity — the ability to sense internal bodily states. Mindfulness practices are one route by which that capacity can be developed, and research shows they reliably alter interoceptive processing.
Enjoyed this article? Sign up here to receive future blogs, insights, and updates from us.
References
Barrett, L. F., & Simmons, W. K. (2015). Interoceptive predictions in the brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 16(7), 419–429. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3950
Craig, A. D. (2002). How do you feel? Interoception: The sense of the physiological condition of the body. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 3(8), 655–666. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn894
Craig, A. D. (2009). How do you feel — now? The anterior insula and human awareness. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10(1), 59–70. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2555
Critchley, H. D., Wiens, S., Rotshtein, P., Öhman, A., & Dolan, R. J. (2004). Neural systems supporting interoceptive awareness. Nature Neuroscience, 7(2), 189–195. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1176
Farb, N., Daubenmier, J., Price, C. J., Gard, T., Kerr, C., Dunn, B. D., Klein, A. C., Paulus, M. P., & Mehling, W. E. (2015). Interoception, contemplative practice, and health. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 763. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00763
Garfinkel, S. N., Seth, A. K., Barrett, A. B., Suzuki, K., & Critchley, H. D. (2015). Knowing your own heart: Distinguishing interoceptive accuracy from interoceptive awareness. Biological Psychology, 104, 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2014.11.004
Khalsa, S. S., Adolphs, R., Cameron, O. G., Critchley, H. D., Davenport, P. W., Feinstein, J. S., Feusner, J. D., Garfinkel, S. N., Lane, R. D., Mehling, W. E., Meuret, A. E., Nemeroff, C. B., Oppenheimer, S., Petzschner, F. H., Pollatos, O., Rhudy, J. L., Schramm, L. P., Simmons, W. K., Stein, M. B., … Paulus, M. P. (2018). Interoception and mental health: A roadmap. Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging, 3(6), 501–513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpsc.2017.12.004
Porges, S. W. (1995). Orienting in a defensive world: Mammalian modifications of our evolutionary heritage. A polyvagal theory. Psychophysiology, 32(4), 301–318. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1995.tb01213.x