Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33846491›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Brain electrical traits of logical validity.

Francisco Salto, Carmen Requena, Paula Álvarez-Merino, Luís F Antón-Toro, Fernando Maestú

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 52% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Francisco SaltoUniversidad de León, León, Spain. francisco.salto@unileon.es.
Carmen RequenaUniversidad de León, León, Spain.
Paula Álvarez-MerinoUniversidad of Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain.
Luís F Antón-ToroLaboratory of Cognitive and Computational Neuroscience, Universidad Complutense/Universidad Politécnica, Madrid, Spain.
Fernando MaestúLaboratory of Cognitive and Computational Neuroscience, Universidad Complutense/Universidad Politécnica, Madrid, Spain.
Universidad de León · ESUniversidad de Valladolid · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neuroscience has studied deductive reasoning over the last 20 years under the assumption that deductive inferences are not only de jure but also de facto distinct from other forms of inference. The objective of this research is to verify if logically valid deductions leave any cerebral electrical trait that is distinct from the trait left by non-valid deductions. 23 subjects with an average age of 20.35 years were registered with MEG and placed into a two conditions paradigm (100 trials for each condition) which each presented the exact same relational complexity (same variables and content) but had distinct logical complexity. Both conditions show the same electromagnetic components (P3, N4) in the early temporal window (250-525 ms) and P6 in the late temporal window (500-775 ms). The significant activity in both valid and invalid conditions is found in sensors from medial prefrontal regions, probably corresponding to the ACC or to the medial prefrontal cortex. The amplitude and intensity of valid deductions is significantly lower in both temporal windows (p = 0.0003). The reaction time was 54.37% slower in the valid condition. Validity leaves a minimal but measurable hypoactive electrical trait in brain processing. The minor electrical demand is attributable to the recursive and automatable character of valid deductions, suggesting a physical indicator of computational deductive properties. It is hypothesized that all valid deductions are recursive and hypoactive.

Indexed as

ElectricityLogicBehaviorBrainElectric StimulationFemaleHumansMagnetoencephalographyMalePrefrontal CortexReaction TimeReproducibility of ResultsTask Performance and AnalysisYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID33846491
PMCPMC8042011
OpenAlexW3154475323

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.