False (bogus) physiological feedback paradigm

Valins (1966), “Cognitive effects of false heart-rate feedback.” Participants’ beliefs about their own cardiac responses are manipulated with fabricated feedback; the question is whether believed bodily change alone shifts emotional evaluation.

Two readings that recur in the wiki

• Friedman (2010) — the “apogee” of 1960s cognitive views: false-feedback effects implied actual ANS feedback was incidental to feeling (“primarily a result of cognitive factors and not physiological ones”). Friedman notes this is not irreconcilable with the somatic-marker-hypothesis: somatosensory cortex may simulate bodily feedback (an “as-if” loop), making the effect physiological after all.
• Seth (2013) — false feedback is predicted by interoceptive-inference: Gray et al. (2007) found false cardiac feedback increased right-AIC responses and the emotional salience attributed to previously unthreatening stimuli. In predictive-coding terms, injected (false) interoceptive evidence updates the generative model and thus the felt emotion — top-down and bottom-up are two directions of one loop, not “cognitive vs physiological.”

The same paradigm thus flips meaning depending on framework: evidence against the body’s role under 1960s cognitivism, evidence for an integrated predictive body-model under Seth. See feedforward-vs-predictive-interoception.