Neuroanatomical Correlates of Human Reasoning
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Neuroanatomical Correlates of Human Reasoning Vinod Goel and Brian Gold York University Shitij Kapur Downloaded from http://mitprc.silverchair.com/jocn/article-pdf/10/3/293/1758328/089892998562744.pdf by guest on 18 May 2021 University of Toronto and Rotman Research Institute of Baycrest Centre Sylvain Houle University of Toronto Abstract ■ One of the important questions cognitive theories of rea- semantically comprehended sets of three sentences. In the soning must address is whether logical reasoning is inherently deductive reasoning conditions subjects determined whether sentential or spatial. A sentential model would exploit nonspa- the third sentence was entailed by the ªrst two sentences. tial (linguistic) properties of representations whereas a spatial The areas of activation in each reasoning condition were model would exploit spatial properties of representations. In conªned to the left hemisphere and were similar to each other general terms, the linguistic hypothesis predicts that the lan- and to activation reported in previous studies. They included guage processing regions underwrite human reasoning proc- the left inferior frontal gyrus (Brodmann areas 45, 47), a portion esses, and the spatial hypothesis suggests that the neural of the left middle frontal gyrus (Brodmann area 46), the left structures for perception and motor control contribute the middle temporal gyrus (Brodmann areas 21, 22), a region of the basic representational building blocks used for high-level logi- left lateral inferior temporal gyrus and superior temporal gyrus 15 cal and linguistic reasoning. We carried out a [ O] H2O PET (Brodmann areas 22, 37), and a portion of the left cingulate imaging study to address this issue. gyrus (Brodmann areas 32, 24). There was no signiªcant right- Twelve normal volunteers performed three types of deduc- hemisphere or parietal activation. These results are consistent tive reasoning tasks (categorical syllogisms, three-term spatial with previous neuroimaging studies and raise questions about relational items, and three-term nonspatial relational items) the level of involvement of classic spatial regions in reasoning while their regional cerebral blood ºow pattern was recorded about linguistically presented spatial relations. ■ 15 using [ O] H2O PET imaging. In the control condition subjects INTRODUCTION light strikes it, the leather is scored by six almost parallel cuts. Obviously they have been caused by Reasoning is the process of evaluating given information someone who has very carelessly scraped round and reaching conclusions that are not explicitly stated. the edges of the sole in order to remove crusted Here is literature’s most celebrated reasoner (Conan mud from it. Hence, you see, my double deduction Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes in Scandal in Bohemia) im- that you had been out in vile weather, and that you pressing his friend Watson: had a particularly malignant boot-slicking specimen of the London slavery. As to your practice, if a gentle- Then he stood before the ªre, and looked me over man walks into my rooms, smelling of iodoform, in his singular introspective fashion. with a black mark of nitrate of silver upon his right “Wedlock suits you,” he remarked. And in prac- fore-ªnger, and a bulge on the side of his top-hat to tice again, I observe, You did not tell me that you show where he has secreted his stethoscope, I intended to go into harness.” must be dull indeed if I do not pronounce him to “Then how do you know?” be an active member of the medical profession.” “I see it, I deduce it. How do I know that you have been getting yourself very wet lately, and that you More mundane examples are the following: Upon be- have a most clumsy and careless servant girl?” ing told that George is a bachelor, I automatically infer “It is simplicity itself,” said he; “my eyes tell me that that George is not married. Or upon learning that Linda on the inside of your left shoe, just where the ªre- will not come to my barbecue if it rains on Saturday, and © 1998 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 10:3, pp. 293–302 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/089892998562744 by guest on 25 September 2021 noting that it is indeed raining on Saturday, I do not set of representations. Sentential representations are associ- a place for her. Although not as impressive as Holmes’ ated with “mental logic” models (Braine, 1978; Rips, conclusions, our conclusions emerge in a straightforward 1994). Spatial representations are typically associated way from the provided information. with the mental model theory of reasoning (Bauer & Human reasoning—the ability to draw such conclu- Johnson-Laird, 1993; Johnson-Laird, 1994; Johnson-Laird sions—lies at the core of higher-level cognition and is an & Byrne, 1991). Mental models do not have to be spatial, important area of study in cognitive science. On a ªrst but insofar as structural relations are preserved in the pass, the cognitive literature on reasoning can be divided mapping from world to model, arguments involving spa- into the study of deduction and induction. Deductive tial relations will involve spatial encoding. arguments can be evaluated for validity. Validity is a In general terms, the linguistic hypothesis predicts Downloaded from http://mitprc.silverchair.com/jocn/article-pdf/10/3/293/1758328/089892998562744.pdf by guest on 18 May 2021 function of the relationship between premises and con- that the language processing regions underwrite human clusion and involves the claim that the premises provide reasoning processes, and the spatial hypothesis suggests absolute grounds for accepting the conclusion. Argu- that the neural structures for perception and motor ments in which the premises provide only limited control contribute the basic representational building grounds for accepting the conclusion are broadly called blocks used for high-level logic and linguistic reasoning. inductive arguments. While invalid, inductive arguments However, most of what we know about human reason- can be evaluated for plausibility or reasonableness. But, ing is informed by behavioral data and computational whereas, validity can be reduced to a function of the considerations. Little is known about the neuroanatomi- logical structure of sentences and arguments, induction cal correlates of reasoning processes. This is of course is a function of the content of the sentences and our not a criticism. Given the absence of robust animal knowledge of the world. It is usually a matter of knowing models of reasoning, it is inevitable. But recent advances which properties generalize in the required manner and in vivo positron emission tomography (PET) and func- which do not. tional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) techniques The illustrations we began with provide examples of have made it possible to probe the neurophysiological both argument types. Holmes’ conclusions take us far basis of human reasoning. Such explorations allow us to beyond the given information, and despite Doyle’s insis- map out the neuroanatomical correlates of reasoning tence, are not deductions, in the technical sense of the processes. They also provide data points to inform the word. They are instances of induction. What Holmes development of cognitive models. observes does not provide absolute grounds for accept- Goel, Gold, Kapur, and Houle (1997) carried out a ing the conclusion he draws. For example, it is plausible study to explore the neuroanatomical correlates of in- that the “six almost parallel cuts” on Watson’s left shoe ductive and deductive reasoning using paradigms were “caused by someone who has very carelessly adopted from the cognitive reasoning literature. They scraped round the edges of the sole in order to remove had 10 normal volunteers perform deductive and induc- crusted mud from it.” But it is equally plausible that tive reasoning tasks while their regional cerebral blood 15 someone was trying to scrape grease from the soles or ºow (rCBF) pattern was recorded using the [ O] H2O that the shoe scraped against a sharp object while Wat- PET imaging technique. Subjects were presented with son was wearing it. arguments of the following type and asked to make Our more mundane examples are instances of deduc- judgments about validity and plausibility:1 tion. They do not take us beyond the given information. 1. All men are mortal; Socrates is a man The conclusions are contained within the premises and ∴ Socrates is mortal are independent of the content of the sentences. For 2. If Socrates is a cat, he has 9 lives; Socrates is a cat example, given the information that Linda will not come ∴ Socrates has 9 lives to my barbecue if it is raining, and it is indeed raining, 3. Socrates is a cat, Socrates has 32 teeth the only possible conclusion is that Linda will not come. ∴ All cats have 32 teeth Furthermore, the same conclusion holds irrespective of 4. Socrates is a cat; Socrates has a broken tooth whether the individual in question is Linda or Mary or ∴ All cats have a broken tooth whether the event in question is a barbecue or a dinner party. The deduction condition resulted in activation of the Over the years a number of sophisticated cognitive left inferior frontal gyrus (Brodmann areas 45, 47) and a and computational models of deductive reasoning have region of the left superior occipital gyrus (Brodmann been developed (Evans, Newstead, & Byrne, 1993; area 19). The induction condition resulted in activation Johnson-Laird, 1993, 1994; Newell, 1980, 1990; Polk & of a large area comprised of the left medial frontal gyrus, Newell, 1995). One important question these models the left cingulate gyrus, and the left superior frontal have to address is whether logical reasoning is inher- gyrus (Brodmann areas 8, 9, 24, 32). Other frontal areas ently sentential or spatial. A sentential model would ex- activated were the orbital aspect of the left inferior ploit nonspatial (linguistic) properties of representations frontal gyrus (Brodmann area 47) and the left middle whereas a spatial model would exploit spatial properties frontal gyrus (Brodmann area 10).