Sevim Emir Faruk, Yildirim Yasin, Ünsal Esra, Dalmizrak Esra, Güntekin Bahar
Department of Neuroscience, Institute of Health Sciences, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Research Institute for Health Sciences and Technologies (SABITA), Neuroscience Research Center, Clinical Electrophysiology, Neuroimaging and Neuromodulation Lab, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Brain Behav. 2025 Jan;15(1):e70179. doi: 10.1002/brb3.70179.
The neural substrates of reasoning, a cognitive ability we use constantly in daily life, are still unclear. Reasoning can be divided into two types according to how the inference process works and the certainty of the conclusions. In deductive reasoning, certain conclusions are drawn from premises by applying the rules of logic. On the other hand, in probabilistic reasoning, possible conclusions are drawn by interpreting the semantic content of arguments.
We examined event-related oscillations associated with deductive and probabilistic reasoning. To better represent the natural use of reasoning, we adopted a design that required participants to choose what type of reasoning they would use. Twenty healthy participants judged the truth values of alternative conclusion propositions following two premises while the EEG was being recorded. We then analyzed event-related delta and theta power and phase-locking induced under two different conditions.
We found that the reaction time was shorter and the accuracy rate was higher in deductive reasoning than in probabilistic reasoning. High delta and theta power in the temporoparietal, parietal, and occipital regions of the brain were observed in deductive reasoning. As for the probabilistic reasoning, prolonged delta response in the right hemisphere and high frontal theta phase-locking were noted.
Our results suggest that the electrophysiological signatures of the two types of reasoning have distinct characteristics. There are significant differences in the delta and theta responses that are associated with deductive and probabilistic reasoning. Although our findings suggest that deductive and probabilistic reasoning have different neural substrates, consistent with most of the studies in the literature, there is not yet enough evidence to make a comprehensive claim on the subject. There is a need to diversify the growing literature on deductive and probabilistic reasoning with different methods and experimental paradigms.
推理作为我们在日常生活中经常使用的一种认知能力,其神经基础仍不明确。根据推理过程的运作方式和结论的确定性,推理可分为两种类型。在演绎推理中,通过应用逻辑规则从前提得出确定的结论。另一方面,在概率推理中,通过解释论据的语义内容得出可能的结论。
我们研究了与演绎推理和概率推理相关的事件相关振荡。为了更好地体现推理的自然运用,我们采用了一种设计,要求参与者选择他们将使用的推理类型。在记录脑电图(EEG)的同时,20名健康参与者根据两个前提判断替代结论命题的真值。然后我们分析了在两种不同条件下诱发的事件相关δ波和θ波功率以及锁相。
我们发现,演绎推理的反应时间比概率推理短,准确率也更高。在演绎推理中,观察到大脑颞顶叶、顶叶和枕叶区域有较高的δ波和θ波功率。至于概率推理,右侧半球的δ波反应延长,额叶θ波高度锁相。
我们的结果表明,两种类型推理的电生理特征具有明显差异。与演绎推理和概率推理相关的δ波和θ波反应存在显著差异。尽管我们的研究结果表明演绎推理和概率推理有不同的神经基础,这与文献中的大多数研究一致,但目前还没有足够的证据对该主题进行全面的论断。需要用不同的方法和实验范式使关于演绎推理和概率推理的不断增长的文献多样化。