Fig 1.
A graphical model presenting the nature of dependencies between interoceptive sensibility (autonomic reactivity), alexithymia, and difficulties in emotion regulation in explaining an inclination to somatoform disorders.
Table 1.
Descriptive statistics and t-tests of the clinical (ASD) and control group.
Table 2.
The analysis of correlations between particular dimensions of interoceptive sensibility, alexithymia, difficulties in emotion regulation, autism and the intensification of somatoform disorders.
Fig 2.
A graphical model presenting the nature of dependencies in moderation model.
Fig 3.
The moderation effect of the clinical and control group on the relation between interoceptive sensibility (autonomic reactivity) and somatoform disorders.
Interoceptive sensibility (autonomic reactivity) was measured by Body Perception Questionnaire-Short Form (BPQ-SF). Somatoform disorders was measured by Somatoform Dissociation Questionnaire (SDQ-20).
Fig 4.
The model of mediation for the tendency toward alexithymia between the impact of interoceptive sensibility (autonomic reactivity) on the level of somatoform disorders.
*-p<0,05; Significant mediation relation are marked in bold. Direct effect–X on Y without the influence of M1 –c. Indirect effect of X on Y through M—a1,b1; a2,b2; a3,b3. Direct effect–X on Y including the influence of M–c`1;c`2;c`3. Interoceptive sensibility (autonomic reactivity) was measured by Body Perception Questionnaire-Short Form (BPQ-SF). Somatoform disorders was measured by Somatoform Dissociation Questionnaire (SDQ-20). Alexithymia was measured by The Toronto Alexithymia Scale– 20 (TAS-20).
Fig 5.
The model of mediation for the tendency toward difficulty in regulation emotion between the impact of interoceptive sensibility(autonomic reactivity) on the level of somatoform disorders.
*-p<0,05; Significant mediation relation are marked in bold. Direct effect–X on Y without the influence of M1 –c. Indirect effect of X on Y through M—a1,b1; a2,b2; a3,b3; a4,b4; a5,b5; a6,b6. Direct effect–X on Y including the influence of M–c`1; c`2;c`3,c`4,c`5,c`6. Interoceptive sensibility (autonomic reactivity) was measured by Body Perception Questionnaire-Short Form (BPQ-SF). Somatoform disorders was measured by Somatoform Dissociation Questionnaire (SDQ-20). Difficulty in regulation emotion was measured by Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS).
Fig 6.
Serial multiple mediational model for the relation between an interoceptive sensibility (autonomic reactivity) and somatoform disorders, where alexithymia and difficulties in emotion regulation constitute mediators.
(c) A direct effect of the impact of interoceptive sensibility on the somatoform disorders. (a1, b1) An indirect effect of the impact of interoceptive sensibility on the somatoform disorders, including alexithymia. (a2, b2) An indirect effect of the impact of interoceptive sensibility on the somatoform disorders, including Difficulties in Emotion Regulation. (a1, d21, b2) An indirect effect of the impact of interoceptive sensibility on the somatoform disorders, including Alexithymia and Difficulties in Emotion Regulation. (c`) A direct effect of the impact of interoceptive sensibility on the somatoform disorders, taking account of the impact of both mediators. *-p<0,05; **-p<0,01. Interoceptive sensibility (autonomic reactivity) was measured by Body Perception Questionnaire-Short Form (BPQ-SF). Somatoform disorders was measured by Somatoform Dissociation Questionnaire (SDQ-20). Difficulty in regulation emotion was measured by Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS). Alexithymia was measured by The Toronto Alexithymia Scale– 20 (TAS-20).