Perceived Control Over Breathing Perturbations Depends on Interosensory Input and Prediction Error

Abstract

Interoception and homeostatic/allostatic control are not only fundamental for survival but play a key role for maintaining somatic and mental health. Furthermore, metacognitive evaluations of these processes, such as perceived failure of allostatic regulation, have been proposed to underlie the experience of chronic symptoms, such as chronic fatigue. A central question in this regard is what mechanisms the brain uses to evaluate control over bodily states. A prominent computational proposal posits that this is achieved by monitoring of interoceptive prediction errors (PEs). However, to date, this proposal has not been tested experimentally. Here, we tested this hypothesis by applying computational process models of perceived control to data from a novel behavioural paradigm, the Respiratory Metacognition of Control Task (RMCT). The RMCT manipulates control over breathing by changing inspiratory resistive loads as a function of control achieved in a gamified prediction task. We developed and compared trial-by-trial generative models of perceived explicit control in the RMCT, using data from 50 volunteers in a pre-registered analysis. Bayesian model selection suggested that perceived control over breathing is best explained as a function of both trial-wise interoceptive outcomes (breathing with or without an inspiratory resistive load) and trial-wise PEs about respiratory resistance. These results support a longstanding computational proposal of how the brain detects failures of bodily regulation and provide a mechanistic model for understanding inter-individual differences in perceived control over bodily states.