Poldrack Russell A
Department of Psychology and Brain Research Institute, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1563, USA.
Trends Cogn Sci. 2006 Feb;10(2):59-63. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.12.004. Epub 2006 Jan 6.
There is much interest currently in using functional neuroimaging techniques to understand better the nature of cognition. One particular practice that has become common is 'reverse inference', by which the engagement of a particular cognitive process is inferred from the activation of a particular brain region. Such inferences are not deductively valid, but can still provide some information. Using a Bayesian analysis of the BrainMap neuroimaging database, I characterize the amount of additional evidence in favor of the engagement of a cognitive process that can be offered by a reverse inference. Its usefulness is particularly limited by the selectivity of activation in the region of interest. I argue that cognitive neuroscientists should be circumspect in the use of reverse inference, particularly when selectivity of the region in question cannot be established or is known to be weak.
当前，人们对使用功能性神经成像技术来更好地理解认知的本质有着浓厚兴趣。一种特别常见的做法是“反向推理”，即从特定脑区的激活推断出特定认知过程的参与。这种推理在演绎上并不有效，但仍能提供一些信息。通过对BrainMap神经成像数据库进行贝叶斯分析，我描述了反向推理能够提供的支持认知过程参与的额外证据的数量。其有用性尤其受到感兴趣区域激活选择性的限制。我认为认知神经科学家在使用反向推理时应谨慎，特别是当相关区域的选择性无法确定或已知较弱时。
