Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026
Body-technology interfaces: digital corporeality and emerging psychopathology.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ricci Valerio, Martinotti Giovanni, Chiappini Stefania
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The proliferation of body-technology interfaces - including wearable devices, virtual reality, augmented reality, and digital body modification applications - has significantly influenced contemporary embodied experience, raising novel questions for psychopathology research and clinical practice.
OBJECTIVES: This analysis examines how modern body-technology interfaces influence bodily experience and identifies proposed clinical presentations arising from these interactions, discussing their theoretical grounding and implications for assessment and treatment.
METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive interdisciplinary review integrating phenomenological, neuroscientific, and clinical perspectives to characterize technology-related embodiment presentations and discuss existing and potential therapeutic approaches within established clinical frameworks. Literature was identified through PubMed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar searches (1990-2025), using terms related to embodiment, body-technology interfaces, virtual and augmented reality, wearable devices, and emerging psychopathology. Sources spanning neuroscientific, clinical, phenomenological, and ethnographic perspectives were selected based on direct relevance to the review scope.
RESULTS: Eight proposed clinical constructs are described across four domains: body image disorders (filter dysmorphia, tracking dysperception), embodiment disorders in virtual environments (virtual depersonalization disorder, avatar-body identity conflict), disorders of technologically mediated proprioception (proprioceptive lag syndrome, augmented sensorimotor confusion disorder), and behavioral addictions (self-tracking addiction, virtual embodiment addiction. These constructs are grounded in documented neurobiological mechanisms involving body representation, interoceptive processing, and reward circuits. Current evidence consists primarily of theoretical elaborations, case reports, and ethnographic observations; epidemiological data remain limited. The proposed constructs are best understood as technology-amplified variants of established conditions or as hypotheses warranting empirical investigation rather than validated independent diagnostic entities.
CONCLUSIONS: Body-technology interfaces generate psychopathological presentations that existing clinical frameworks may not fully capture. Future research should focus on empirically validating these proposed constructs, developing standardized assessment instruments, and establishing evidence-based therapeutic protocols. Ethical dimensions, including differential access and algorithmic normalization of bodily experience, require ongoing clinical and policy attention.
OBJECTIVES: This analysis examines how modern body-technology interfaces influence bodily experience and identifies proposed clinical presentations arising from these interactions, discussing their theoretical grounding and implications for assessment and treatment.
METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive interdisciplinary review integrating phenomenological, neuroscientific, and clinical perspectives to characterize technology-related embodiment presentations and discuss existing and potential therapeutic approaches within established clinical frameworks. Literature was identified through PubMed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar searches (1990-2025), using terms related to embodiment, body-technology interfaces, virtual and augmented reality, wearable devices, and emerging psychopathology. Sources spanning neuroscientific, clinical, phenomenological, and ethnographic perspectives were selected based on direct relevance to the review scope.
RESULTS: Eight proposed clinical constructs are described across four domains: body image disorders (filter dysmorphia, tracking dysperception), embodiment disorders in virtual environments (virtual depersonalization disorder, avatar-body identity conflict), disorders of technologically mediated proprioception (proprioceptive lag syndrome, augmented sensorimotor confusion disorder), and behavioral addictions (self-tracking addiction, virtual embodiment addiction. These constructs are grounded in documented neurobiological mechanisms involving body representation, interoceptive processing, and reward circuits. Current evidence consists primarily of theoretical elaborations, case reports, and ethnographic observations; epidemiological data remain limited. The proposed constructs are best understood as technology-amplified variants of established conditions or as hypotheses warranting empirical investigation rather than validated independent diagnostic entities.
CONCLUSIONS: Body-technology interfaces generate psychopathological presentations that existing clinical frameworks may not fully capture. Future research should focus on empirically validating these proposed constructs, developing standardized assessment instruments, and establishing evidence-based therapeutic protocols. Ethical dimensions, including differential access and algorithmic normalization of bodily experience, require ongoing clinical and policy attention.