Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39778028›Full record

ArticleBrain and behavior2025

Distinctive Delta and Theta Responses in Deductive and Probabilistic Reasoning.

Emir Faruk Sevim, Yasin Yildirim, Esra Ünsal, Esra Dalmizrak, Bahar Güntekin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain and behavior, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Emir Faruk SevimDepartment of Neuroscience, Institute of Health Sciences, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9661-9689
Yasin YildirimDepartment of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Institute of Health Sciences, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9362-7205
Esra ÜnsalDepartment of Neuroscience, Institute of Health Sciences, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6027-296X
Esra DalmizrakDepartment of Neuroscience, Institute of Health Sciences, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6926-5176
Bahar GüntekinResearch Institute for Health Sciences and Technologies (SABITA), Neuroscience Research Center, Clinical Electrophysiology, Neuroimaging and Neuromodulation Lab, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0860-0524

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe 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.

methodsWe 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.

resultsWe 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.

conclusionOur 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.

Indexed as

Delta RhythmTheta RhythmAdultBrainElectroencephalographyEvoked PotentialsFemaleHumansMaleReaction TimeThinkingYoung Adultconditional reasoningdeductive reasoningelectroencephalographyevent‐related oscillationsprobabilistic reasoning

Identifiers

PMID39778028
PMCPMC11706720

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.