English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The paper is devoted to an experimental comparison of two hypotheses of the genesis of bodily sensations in psychosomatics: in accordance with the hypothesis of “general somatic sensitivity”, the key role in somatization is played by the general attention to sensations, whereas in accordance with the concepts of the personal meaning, sensations depend on their subjective meaning. In 36 patients (15 men) without somatic illnesses aged 18 to 25 years, during the task of self-regulation using the biofeedback method, attention was drawn to sensations in the head and neck region with one of three instructions (emphasizing the neutral, positive and negative personal meaning of sensations); then they filled the Screening of Somatoform Symptoms and the Cognitive Beliefs About Body and Health Questionnaire. In 50% of respondents general attention led to sensations in a head and a neck. The risk was higher at the persons inclined to somatization and considering their body as weak and vulnerable. Both positive and negative personal meaning increased the probability of provocation, especially in persons with a tendency to catastrophize bodily sensations. Negative meaning was related to sensations of different localizations.

Positive and negative priming as a factor of bodily sensations in the healthy controls (on the sensations in head and neck)