Cargando…

How types of premises modulate the typicality effect in category-based induction: diverging evidence from the P2, P3, and LPC effects

Behavioural studies have indicated that semantic typicality influences processing time and accuracy during the performance of inductive reasoning (i.e., the typicality effect). The present study examines this effect by manipulating the types of premises and conclusions (i.e., general, typical, or at...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liang, Xiuling, Chen, Qingfei, Lei, Yi, Li, Hong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5159785/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27982022
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep37890
_version_ 1782481818151288832
author Liang, Xiuling
Chen, Qingfei
Lei, Yi
Li, Hong
author_facet Liang, Xiuling
Chen, Qingfei
Lei, Yi
Li, Hong
author_sort Liang, Xiuling
collection PubMed
description Behavioural studies have indicated that semantic typicality influences processing time and accuracy during the performance of inductive reasoning (i.e., the typicality effect). The present study examines this effect by manipulating the types of premises and conclusions (i.e., general, typical, or atypical) at an electrophysiological level using a semantic category-based induction task. With regard to behavioural results, higher inductive strength was found in typical conclusions in all premise conditions, whereas a longer response time for atypical conclusions was only found in general and typical premise conditions. The ERP results had different response patterns: in the general premise condition, a larger P2, as well as a smaller P3 and LPC (500–600 ms), were elicited by atypical conclusions relative to typical ones; in the typical premise condition, a larger P2 and LPC (600–700 ms) were found for atypical conclusions; in the atypical premise condition, however, only a larger P2 was found for atypical conclusions. The divergent evidence for the typicality effect indicated that the processing of the typicality effect in general, and specific premise conditions, might involve different cognitive processes, such as resource allocation and inference violation, which yielded new insights into the neural underpinnings of the typicality effect in a category-based induction.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5159785
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Nature Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51597852016-12-21 How types of premises modulate the typicality effect in category-based induction: diverging evidence from the P2, P3, and LPC effects Liang, Xiuling Chen, Qingfei Lei, Yi Li, Hong Sci Rep Article Behavioural studies have indicated that semantic typicality influences processing time and accuracy during the performance of inductive reasoning (i.e., the typicality effect). The present study examines this effect by manipulating the types of premises and conclusions (i.e., general, typical, or atypical) at an electrophysiological level using a semantic category-based induction task. With regard to behavioural results, higher inductive strength was found in typical conclusions in all premise conditions, whereas a longer response time for atypical conclusions was only found in general and typical premise conditions. The ERP results had different response patterns: in the general premise condition, a larger P2, as well as a smaller P3 and LPC (500–600 ms), were elicited by atypical conclusions relative to typical ones; in the typical premise condition, a larger P2 and LPC (600–700 ms) were found for atypical conclusions; in the atypical premise condition, however, only a larger P2 was found for atypical conclusions. The divergent evidence for the typicality effect indicated that the processing of the typicality effect in general, and specific premise conditions, might involve different cognitive processes, such as resource allocation and inference violation, which yielded new insights into the neural underpinnings of the typicality effect in a category-based induction. Nature Publishing Group 2016-12-16 /pmc/articles/PMC5159785/ /pubmed/27982022 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep37890 Text en Copyright © 2016, The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
spellingShingle Article
Liang, Xiuling
Chen, Qingfei
Lei, Yi
Li, Hong
How types of premises modulate the typicality effect in category-based induction: diverging evidence from the P2, P3, and LPC effects
title How types of premises modulate the typicality effect in category-based induction: diverging evidence from the P2, P3, and LPC effects
title_full How types of premises modulate the typicality effect in category-based induction: diverging evidence from the P2, P3, and LPC effects
title_fullStr How types of premises modulate the typicality effect in category-based induction: diverging evidence from the P2, P3, and LPC effects
title_full_unstemmed How types of premises modulate the typicality effect in category-based induction: diverging evidence from the P2, P3, and LPC effects
title_short How types of premises modulate the typicality effect in category-based induction: diverging evidence from the P2, P3, and LPC effects
title_sort how types of premises modulate the typicality effect in category-based induction: diverging evidence from the p2, p3, and lpc effects
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5159785/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27982022
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep37890
work_keys_str_mv AT liangxiuling howtypesofpremisesmodulatethetypicalityeffectincategorybasedinductiondivergingevidencefromthep2p3andlpceffects
AT chenqingfei howtypesofpremisesmodulatethetypicalityeffectincategorybasedinductiondivergingevidencefromthep2p3andlpceffects
AT leiyi howtypesofpremisesmodulatethetypicalityeffectincategorybasedinductiondivergingevidencefromthep2p3andlpceffects
AT lihong howtypesofpremisesmodulatethetypicalityeffectincategorybasedinductiondivergingevidencefromthep2p3andlpceffects