ArticlePloS one2024
Partially dissociative role of the left inferior frontal gyrus and left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in reasoning.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A review on the reporting and assessment of adverse effects associated with high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reasoning is the ability to formulate inferences or conclusions from available information. The two major types, deductive and inductive, are thought to rely on distinct cognitive mechanisms and recruit separate brain areas. Neuroimaging studies yield mixed results; some found the left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) activations for deductive reasoning and the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) for inductive reasoning. This assumption was put to the test in the present study. In two double-blinded, sham-controlled experiments, high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) was used to systematically explore the left IFG's and DLPFC's causal role in deductive and inductive reasoning. Participants with no formal training in logic judged deductive and inductive arguments before and after 10 minutes of anodal, cathodal, or sham tDCS of the left IFG (Experiment 1, n = 20) or left DLPFC (Experiment 2, n = 21). Left IFG anodal tDCS impairs reaction times (RTs) for easy categorical (p = < .001) and propositional (p = .025) deductive arguments and the accuracy for easy inductive propositional arguments (p = .003). Meanwhile, regardless of the active stimulation conditions, left DLPFC tDCS shortens RTs (anodal: p = < .001, cathodal: p = .014) and increases accuracy (anodal: p = .029, cathodal: p = .001) for difficult categorical inductive arguments, but decreases accuracy (anodal: p = .027, cathodal: p = < .001) for difficult propositional inductive arguments. The overall results showed a partial dissociation of the left frontal lobe areas subserving the two types of reasoning and argument difficulty-dependent stimulation effects. This study extends knowledge of the neural basis of reasoning and hopefully inspires interventions that could augment reasoning impairments associated with normal aging and brain lesions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.