Psychometric Properties of the Taiwanese Translation of the Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness, Version 2 (MAIA-2)
This study validates the psychometric properties of the Taiwanese translation of the Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness, Version 2 (MAIA-2), confirming its reliability and construct validity while suggesting that a modified eight-factor model with four removed items offers a better fit than the original structure.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
The human mind does not exist in a vacuum; it is deeply tethered to the body. We have long understood that our thoughts influence our physical state, but a growing field of science is now turning the lens inward, examining how we perceive the signals coming from within ourselves. This internal sense, known as interoception, is the ability to notice, interpret, and make use of sensations like a racing heart, a tight chest, or a flutter in the stomach. It is not merely about feeling pain or hunger; it is about how we consciously attend to these signals and how we react to them. Researchers believe that the way a person processes these internal cues plays a fundamental role in their emotional health, influencing everything from how they handle stress to how they manage anxiety. When this internal awareness is sharp and balanced, it often supports better emotional regulation. When it is clouded or ignored, it can contribute to psychological distress. To study this complex relationship, scientists need reliable tools to measure how people experience their own bodies, leading to the development of specific questionnaires designed to map these invisible internal landscapes.
In a recent study, researchers set out to test one of these tools, the Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness, Version 2, within the context of Taiwanese culture. This questionnaire is designed to break down the broad concept of body awareness into eight distinct parts, ranging from the simple act of noticing a sensation to the ability to trust one's body as a safe place. While the tool had been translated into many languages, the researchers wanted to ensure it worked just as well for people in Taiwan, where cultural attitudes toward emotions and the body might differ from the Western contexts in which the test was originally developed. They recruited over six hundred adults from the community, carefully screening them to ensure they had no diagnosed psychiatric or chronic physical conditions, and asked them to complete the survey online. To verify the stability of the answers, a portion of these participants returned a month later to take the test again. The researchers then split the data into two groups to first explore the underlying structure of the answers and then to confirm if that structure held up under rigorous statistical testing.
The results painted a picture of a tool that is largely robust but requires a few small adjustments to fit the local context perfectly. The overall questionnaire proved to be highly reliable; people who took the test a month apart gave very similar answers, suggesting the questions consistently measured the same traits over time. The internal consistency of the scores was also strong, meaning the different parts of the test worked together well to form a coherent whole. However, when the researchers looked closer at the specific sections, they found that three of the eight parts—those dealing with simply noticing sensations, not getting distracted by discomfort, and not worrying about physical feelings—were less consistent than the others. In the initial exploration of the data, the answers did not neatly fall into the eight categories the test was originally designed to have. Instead, the responses seemed to group into five broader categories. This suggested that for the people in this study, the way they understood and answered the questions was slightly different from the original design.
To resolve this, the researchers tested a modified version of the test that removed four specific questions that were causing confusion. These problematic questions often asked about ignoring pain or worrying about physical discomfort, and they seemed to be interpreted differently by the participants, perhaps because the cultural understanding of physical pain and emotional worry in Taiwan is distinct. When the researchers removed these four items and re-ran the analysis, the original eight-part structure re-emerged and fit the data much better than the five-part version. This indicates that the core idea of the test—viewing body awareness as a multi-faceted skill—is still valid for this population, but it works best when the specific questions are slightly refined. The study also revealed an interesting pattern in how the participants answered: their responses seemed to be heavily influenced by whether a question felt positive or negative. For instance, questions about feeling calm and safe in one's body clustered together, while questions about pain and worry formed a separate group. This suggests that the emotional tone of the question might be shaping the answer as much as the actual ability to sense the body.
The study concluded that the Taiwanese version of this body awareness tool is a valid and useful instrument, but it is not a perfect copy of the original. The researchers found that while the general framework of eight different skills holds true, the specific way people in Taiwan relate to their bodies involves some nuances that the standard questions did not fully capture. The three weaker sections of the test, particularly those involving worry and distraction, may need further cultural adaptation to work effectively in the future. Furthermore, the findings hint that people in this sample might have a tendency to generalize their emotional experiences, grouping different psychological processes together in ways that differ from Western samples. This does not mean the test failed, but rather that it revealed a unique characteristic of how this population experiences the mind-body connection. By identifying these subtle differences, the study provides a clearer path for using this tool in clinical and research settings within Taiwan, ensuring that when doctors and scientists ask people about their internal sensations, they are truly hearing what those people are experiencing.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.