25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Imaging deductive reasoning and the new paradigm

      review-article
      Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
      Frontiers Media S.A.
      Marr’s levels, Bayesian inference, brain imaging, new paradigm

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          There has been a great expansion of research into human reasoning at all of Marr’s explanatory levels. There is a tendency for this work to progress within a level largely ignoring the others which can lead to slippage between levels (Chater et al., 2003). It is argued that recent brain imaging research on deductive reasoning—implementational level—has largely ignored the new paradigm in reasoning—computational level (Over, 2009). Consequently, recent imaging results are reviewed with the focus on how they relate to the new paradigm. The imaging results are drawn primarily from a recent meta-analysis by Prado et al. ( 2011) but further imaging results are also reviewed where relevant. Three main observations are made. First, the main function of the core brain region identified is most likely elaborative, defeasible reasoning not deductive reasoning. Second, the subtraction methodology and the meta-analytic approach may remove all traces of content specific System 1 processes thought to underpin much human reasoning. Third, interpreting the function of the brain regions activated by a task depends on theories of the function that a task engages. When there are multiple interpretations of that function, interpreting what an active brain region is doing is not clear cut. It is concluded that there is a need to more tightly connect brain activation to function, which could be achieved using formalized computational level models and a parametric variation approach.

          Related collections

          Most cited references73

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity.

          In a sentence reading task, words that occurred out of context were associated with specific types of event-related brain potentials. Words that were physically aberrant (larger than normal) elecited a late positive series of potentials, whereas semantically inappropriate words elicited a late negative wave (N400). The N400 wave may be an electrophysiological sign of the "reprocessing" of semantically anomalous information.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory.

            Reasoning is generally seen as a means to improve knowledge and make better decisions. However, much evidence shows that reasoning often leads to epistemic distortions and poor decisions. This suggests that the function of reasoning should be rethought. Our hypothesis is that the function of reasoning is argumentative. It is to devise and evaluate arguments intended to persuade. Reasoning so conceived is adaptive given the exceptional dependence of humans on communication and their vulnerability to misinformation. A wide range of evidence in the psychology of reasoning and decision making can be reinterpreted and better explained in the light of this hypothesis. Poor performance in standard reasoning tasks is explained by the lack of argumentative context. When the same problems are placed in a proper argumentative setting, people turn out to be skilled arguers. Skilled arguers, however, are not after the truth but after arguments supporting their views. This explains the notorious confirmation bias. This bias is apparent not only when people are actually arguing, but also when they are reasoning proactively from the perspective of having to defend their opinions. Reasoning so motivated can distort evaluations and attitudes and allow erroneous beliefs to persist. Proactively used reasoning also favors decisions that are easy to justify but not necessarily better. In all these instances traditionally described as failures or flaws, reasoning does exactly what can be expected of an argumentative device: Look for arguments that support a given conclusion, and, ceteris paribus, favor conclusions for which arguments can be found.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              How unrealistic optimism is maintained in the face of reality

              Unrealistic optimism is a pervasive human trait influencing domains ranging from personal relationships to politics and finance. How people maintain unrealistic optimism, despite frequently encountering information that challenges those biased beliefs, is unknown. Here, we provide an explanation. Specifically, we show a striking asymmetry, whereby people updated their beliefs more in response to information that was better than expected compared to information that was worse. This selectivity was mediated by a relative failure to code for errors that should reduce optimism. Distinct regions of the prefrontal cortex tracked estimation errors when those called for positive update, both in highly optimistic and low optimistic individuals. However, highly optimistic individuals exhibited reduced tracking of estimation errors that called for negative update within right inferior prefrontal gyrus. These findings show that optimism is tied to a selective update failure, and diminished neural coding, of undesirable information regarding the future.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Hum Neurosci
                Front Hum Neurosci
                Front. Hum. Neurosci.
                Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1662-5161
                27 February 2015
                2015
                : 9
                : 101
                Affiliations
                [1]Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck College, University of London London, UK
                Author notes

                Edited by: Jérôme Prado, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, France

                Reviewed by: Oshin Vartanian, Defence Research and Development Canada; Toronto Research Centre, Canada; Kinga Morsanyi, Queen’s University Belfast, UK

                *Correspondence: Mike Oaksford, Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck College, University of London, Malet Street, London, WC1E 7HX, UK e-mail: mike.oaksford@ 123456bbk.ac.uk

                This article was submitted to the journal Frontiers in Human Neuroscience.

                Article
                10.3389/fnhum.2015.00101
                4343022
                9bd890de-6085-459a-9b83-09405ea2b2d3
                Copyright © 2015 Oaksford.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution and reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 08 October 2014
                : 10 February 2015
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 106, Pages: 14, Words: 14568
                Categories
                Neuroscience
                Review Article

                Neurosciences
                marr’s levels,bayesian inference,brain imaging,new paradigm
                Neurosciences
                marr’s levels, bayesian inference, brain imaging, new paradigm

                Comments

                Comment on this article