A great deal of research has been devoted to examining the neural mechanisms of inductive reasoning. However, the influences of rule validity and time pressure on numerical inductive reasoning remain unclear. In the current study, we aimed to examine the effects of these variables on the time course of rule identification in numerical inductive reasoning. We designed a 3 (task type: valid, invalid, and anomalous) × 2 (time pressure: with time pressure and without time pressure) within-subject experiment based on electroencephalographic event-related potentials (ERP). Behaviorally, we found significant effects of rule validity and time pressure on rule identification. Neurologically, we considered the elicited N200 ERP to reflect conflict detection and found it to be modulated by rule validity but not time pressure. We considered the induced P300 ERP to be primarily related to updating working memory, affected by both rule validity and time pressure. These findings have new implications for better understanding dynamic information processing within numerical inductive reasoning.
BastianC. C. V.OberauerK. (2013).
Distinct transfer effects of training different facets of working memory capacity. Journal of Memory and Language,
69(1), 36–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2013.02.002
3.
ChangW.ShenI.WenC.ChenC. (2020).
Age-related differences between young and old adults: Effects of advance information on task switching.Perceptual and Motor Skills,
127(6), 985–1014. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031512520930872
4.
ChuderskiA. (2013).
The relational integration task explains fluid reasoning above and beyond other working memory tasks.Memory & Cognition,
42(3), 448–463. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-013-0366-x
5.
ChuderskiA. (2015).
The broad factor of working memory is virtually isomorphic to fluid intelligence tested under time pressure. Personality and Individual Differences,
85, 98–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.04.046
ChuderskiA.AndrelczykK.SmolenT. (2013).
An oscillatory model of individual differences in working memory capacity and relational integration. Cognitive Systems Research,
24, 87–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsys.2012.12.005
8.
CrescentiniC.Seyed-AllaeiS.De PisapiaN.JovicichJ.AmatiD.ShalliceT. (2011).
Mechanisms of rule acquisition and rule following in inductive reasoning.Journal of Neuroscience,
31(21), 7763–7774. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4579-10.2011
9.
De NeysW.MoyensE.VansteenwegenD. (2010).
Feeling we’re biased: Autonomic arousal and reasoning conflict.Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience,
10(2), 208–216. https://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.10.2.208
10.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.BuchnerA.LangA. G. (2009).
Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses.Behavior Research Methods,
41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
11.
FolsteinJ. R.PettenC. V. (2008).
Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: A review.Psychophysiology,
45(1), 152–170. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00602.x
12.
ForsterS. E.CarterC. S.CohenJ. D.ChoR. Y. (2011).
Parametric manipulation of the conflict signal and control-state adaptation.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,
23(4), 923–935. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2010.21458
13.
FranssensS.De NeysW. (2009).
The effortless nature of conflict detection during thinking.Thinking & Reasoning,
15(2), 105–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546780802711185
HerronJ. E.QuayleA. H.RuggM. D. (2003).
Probability effects on event-related potential correlates of recognition memory. Cognitive Brain Research,
16(1), 66–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-6410(02)00220-3
17.
HolzmanT. G.PellegrinoJ. W.GlaserR. (1983).
Cognitive variables in series completion. Journal of Educational Psychology,
75(4), 603–618. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.75.4.603
18.
IBM Corp. Released 2013. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 22.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
19.
KohlbergL. (1984). Moral stages and moralization: The cognitive developmental approach. In KohlbergL. (Ed.) The psychology of moral development: The nature and validity of moral stages (Vol.
2, pp. 170–205).
Harper & Row.
20.
LarsonM. J.ClaysonP. E.ClawsonA. (2014).
Making sense of all the conflict: A theoretical review and critique of conflict-related ERPs.International Journal of Psychophysiology,
93(3), 283–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2014.06.007
21.
LefevreJ. A.BisanzJ. (1986).
A cognitive analysis of number-series problems: Sources of individual differences in performance.Memory & Cognition,
14(4), 287–298. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03202506
Liang, P., Zhong, N., Lu, S., Liu, J., Yao, Y., Li, K., & Yang, Y. (2006). The neural mechanism of human numerical inductive reasoning process: A combined ERP and fMRI study. In: Zhong, N., Liu, J., Yao, Y., Wu, J., Lu, S., Li, K. (Ed.) Web Intelligence Meets Brain Informatics (Vol. 4845, pp. 223--243). https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-540-77028-2_12
24.
LiangP.ZhongN.WuJ.LuS.LiuJ.YaoY. (2007). Time dissociative characteristics of numerical inductive reasoning: Behavioral and ERP evidence. In 2007 international joint conference on neural networks (pp. 873–879). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IJCNN.2007.4371073
25.
LohseJ. (2016).
Smart or selfish—When smart guys finish nice. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics,
64, 28–40. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2531634
26.
LubinA.SimonG.HoudéO.De NeysW. (2014).
Inhibition, conflict detection, and number conservation. ZDM Mathematics Education,
47(5), 793–800. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0649-0
27.
McmeekanE. R. L.LishmanW. A. (2011).
Retest reliabilities and interrelationship of the Annett Hand Preference Questionnaire and the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory. British Journal of Psychology,
66(1), 53–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1975.tb01439.x
28.
MinorG.HerzmannG. (2019).
Effects of negative emotion on neural correlates of item and source memory during encoding and retrieval.Brain Research,
1718, 32–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2019.05.001
NieA.GriffinM.KeinathA.WalshM.DittmannA.RederL. (2014).
ERP profiles for face and word recognition are based on their status in semantic memory not their stimulus category.Brain Research,
1557, 66–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2014.02.010
31.
NieA.XiaoY.LiuS.ZhuX.ZhangD. (2019).
Sensitivity of reality monitoring to fluency: Evidence from behavioral performance and event-related potential (ERP) old/new effects.Medical Science Monitor,
25, 9490–9498. https://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.917401
32.
NieA.YeJ.LiM. (2016).
The effect of pre-existing memory representations on repetition-related N250r and N400. Science Bulletin,
61(4), 265–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11434-016-1011-4
33.
NieA.YuY. (2021).
External (versus internal) facial features contribute most to repetition priming in facial recognition: ERP evidence.Perceptual and Motor Skills,
128(1), 15–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031512520957150
34.
Núñez-PeñaM. I.Suárez-PellicioniM. (2014).
Less precise representation of numerical magnitude in high math-anxious individuals: An ERP study of the size and distance effects.Biological Psychology,
103, 176–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2014.09.004
35.
OrghianD.Garcia-MarquesL.MarquesP.BragaJ. (2018).
Memory and conceptual learning of relevant and non-relevant items in item-method directed forgetting.Memory,
26(9), 1233–1243. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2018.1441424
36.
PictonT. W.BentinS.BergP.DonchinE.HillyardS. A.JohnsonR. J. R.MillerG. A.RitterW.RuchkinD. S.RuggM. D.TaylorM. J. (2000).
Guidelines for using human event-related potentials to study cognition: Recording standards and publication criteria. Psychophysiology,
37, 127–152. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8986.3720127
QinJ.XiaoF.LiF.ShaW.LiH. (2009).
The characteristic of extrapolation in numerical inductive inference: An ERP study.Brain Research,
1295, 142–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2009.06.024
39.
Restle, F. (1970). Speed of adding and comparing numbers. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 83, 274--278. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0028573
40.
RossR. S.SmolenA.CurranT.NyhusE. (2018).
MAO-A phenotype effects response sensitivity and the parietal old/new effect during recognition memory.Frontiers in Human Neuroscience,
12, 53. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2018.00053
41.
SiemannJ.PetermannF. (2017).
Evaluation of the triple code model of numerical processing-reviewing past neuroimaging and clinical findings.Research in Developmental Disabilities,
72, 106–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2017.11.001
42.
StussD. T.AlexanderM. P. (2007).
Is there a dysexecutive syndrome?Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences,
362(1481), 901–915. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2096
XiaoF.LongC. Q.ChenQ. F.LiH. (2017).
The rule expectancy effect on the electrophysiological correlates underlying numerical rule acquisition.Neuroscience Letters,
665, 252–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2017.09.052
45.
XiaoF.SunT.QiS.ChenQ. (2019).
Common and distinct brain responses to detecting top-down and bottom-up conflicts underlying numerical inductive reasoning.Psychophysiology,
56(12), e13455. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13455
46.
YanC.LiuF.LiY.ZhangQ.CuiL. (2017).
Mutual influence of reward anticipation and emotion on brain activity during memory retrieval.Frontiers in Psychology,
8, 1873. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01873
47.
Yang, N., Waddington, G., Adams, R., & Han, J. (2017). Translation, cultural adaption, and test-retest reliability of Chinese versions of the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory and Waterloo Footedness Questionnaire. Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition, 23(3), 255--273. https://doi.org/10.1080/1357650X.2017.1357728
48.
YeJ.NieA.LiuS. (2019).
How do word frequency and memory task influence directed forgetting: An ERP study.International Journal of Psychophysiology,
146, 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2019.10.005
49.
ZhangW.ZhouR.YeM. (2013).
Menstrual cycle modulation of the late positive potential evoked by emotional faces. Perceptual and Motor Skills,
116(3), 707–723. https://doi.org/10.2466/22.27.PMS.116.3
50.
ZhouX.ChenC.DongQ.ZhangH.ChenC.QiaoS.ZhaoH.JiangT.GuoY. (2006).
Numerical distance effect in the N240 component in a number-matching task.NeuroReport,
17(10), 991–994. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.wnr.0000221840.12632.9f
51.
ZhouW.NieA.XiaoY.LiuS.DengC. (2020).
Is color source retrieval sensitive to emotion? Electrophysiological evidence from old/new effects.Acta Psychologica,
210, 103156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2020.103156
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
