Correction: Basic emotions reported by individuals with persistent physical symptoms receiving exposure therapy versus healthy lifestyle promotion in primary care

Correction to: Scientific Reports 10.1038/s41598-026-39962-x, published online 17 February 2026

The original version of this Article contained an error. In the Results section under the subheading ‘Test–retest reliability and construct validity of emotions questionnaire’, the incorrect test–retest reliability estimates for the emotion surprise were published and therefore do not match the correct estimates published in Table DS1 in the Supplementary Information file which accompanies the article. In addition, the estimates for shame were inadvertently omitted from the reported ranges summarizing the lowest and highest test–retest reliability estimates across the remaining emotions.

As a result,

“In the PPS participant data, the test–retest reliability for the emotions was acceptable (over a mean of 6.5 days [SD = 3.6]; rs = 0.60–0.88, ρ = 0.60–0.83, ICCs = 0.68–0.80), but with contradictory indicators for surprise, where the rank correlation was suboptimal despite a promising ICC (r = 0.67, ρ = 0.46, ICC = 0.81). We therefore refrained from further analysis of the surprise item.”

now reads:

“In the PPS participant data, the test–retest reliability for the emotions was acceptable (over a mean of 6.5 days [SD = 3.6]; rs = 0.60–0.88, ρs = 0.46–0.83, ICCs = 0.68–0.81), with the exception of surprise (r = 0.07, ρ = 0.45, ICC = 0.60). We therefore refrained from further analysis of the surprise item, although the interpretation of these findings is complicated by the possibility that low test–retest reliability could partly reflect that surprise may be inherently less stable across time points than the other emotions.”

The original Article has been corrected.