bioRxiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/bioRxiv

bioRxiv · 10.1101/2020.05.16.092304

Assumptions belief load impacts brain networks underlying logical reasoning

Ziaei, M.·Bonyadi, M. R.·Reutens, D.
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Prior knowledge and beliefs influence our reasoning in daily life and may lead us to draw unwarranted conclusions with undesirable consequences. The underlying neural correlates of the interaction between belief and logic, prior to making logical decisions, are largely unknown. In this study, we aimed to identify brain regions important in distinguishing belief load of assumptions in logical decision making. Thirty-one healthy volunteers (18-29 years old) participated in an fMRI study and were asked to respond to a series of syllogistic arguments in which assumptions were either congruent (believable) or incongruent (unbelievable) with common knowledge. An interpretable machine learning algorithm, an L1 regularized Support Vector Machine, was used to explain the discriminatory pattern of conditions given the brain activation patterns. Behavioral results confirmed that believable premises were incorrectly endorsed more than unbelievable ones. Imaging results revealed that several connectivity patterns anchored around the insula, amygdala, and IFG were important in distinguishing believable from unbelievable assumptions at different time points preceding logical decisions. Our convergent behavioral and imaging results underscore the importance of the belief loads of our assumptions for a logically sound decision. Our results provide new insights into neural and potential cognitive mechanisms underlying the interaction between belief and logic systems, with important practical implications for social, complex decisions. HighlightsO_LIBelief load of premises impact logical decisions C_LIO_LIRegional importance in distinguishing belief load changes in different TRs C_LIO_LIBelief load of assumptions elicits emotional and salience responses C_LIO_LIRegional connectivity changes as the reasoning process evolves at different TRs C_LIO_LIInsula, caudate, amygdala, and IFG were among highly connected hubs during the task C_LI SignificanceIt has been experimentally shown that decision-makers often ignore given assumptions in favor of their own beliefs, potentially leading them towards a subjective rather than a logical decision. Consider "Carbon emission tax" given the assumption of "global warming". If a decision-maker does not believe in "global warming", the final decision on "Carbon emission tax" is not driven by factual premises but by the personal belief of the decision-maker. Understanding neural mechanisms underlying the interaction between the decision-makers beliefs and factual premises sheds light on factors driving belief bias and potential interventions to circumvent it. The main contribution of this study is to investigate neural mechanisms in a logical reasoning task in which the belief load of the assumptions was manipulated.

Explore related subjects

neurosciencePreprint

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ziaei, M., Bonyadi, M. R., Reutens, D.. 2020-05-17. Assumptions belief load impacts brain networks underlying logical reasoning. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.16.092304

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

bioRxiv2026

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Cell Types in Describing Neuronal Physiological Features

Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) captures detailed gene expression profiles at scale, while patch-clamp recordings measure intrinsic neuronal electrophysiological properties. Modeling the relations between these two modalities remains a challenge. Here, we compare how well electrophysiological features can be predicted by traditional transcriptomic cell type classification, representations derived from a foundational model (scGPT) pretrained on large-scale scRNA-seq datasets, ion channel-coding genes, and highly variable genes. Using paired transcriptomic and electrophysiological patch-sequencing data from 495 human neurons from neurosurgical tissue, we find that cluster-level cell type representations consistently outperform highly variable gene selection, ion channel gene selection, and context-enriched scGPT embeddings. Notably, performance varies across model architectures and initializations, and the best results are obtained by combining the outputs of separate cell type and scGPT-based models. Together, these findings suggest that traditional discrete cellular classification is highly effective in predicting physiological features. For maximum performance it can be complemented by pretrained transformer models.

neuroscience↗
bioRxiv2026

A nonlinear inhibition pathway underlying cortical responses to tuned holographic optogenetic perturbations

Optogenetics enables causal manipulation of cortical activity. Perturbation responses can be counterintuitive due to network interactions, making theory essential for predicting them. Existing approaches often rely on linear approximations, which fail for many biologically relevant perturbations. Here we develop a nonlinear theory of responses to holographic perturbations in cell-type-specific recurrent networks with structured connectivity. We fit a nonlinear model to mouse V1 data, which shows cotuned-ensemble suppression: perturbing spatially clustered neurons with similar preferred orientations yields markedly stronger short-range suppression than perturbing untuned ensembles. We show that cotuned-ensemble suppression arises from a feature-tuned, nonlinear inhibition pathway implicating somatostatin-positive (SST) interneurons. The theory predicts that cotuned ensembles suppress parvalbumin-positive (PV) neurons but facilitate SST neurons, and links the degree of cotuned-ensemble suppression or facilitation to the variance of the SST response. This framework identifies mechanisms by which nonlinear inhibition sculpts cortical dynamics and establishes a predictive basis for targeted optogenetic interventions.

neuroscience↗
bioRxiv2026

Proteomic signatures of APOE ε4 across human tissues and cell types in Alzheimers disease

The apolipoprotein E {varepsilon}4 (APOE {varepsilon}4) allele is the strongest genetic risk factor for late-onset Alzheimers disease (AD). However, the underlying molecular mechanisms remain unclear. This study included 1691 participants from the Religious Orders Study and Rush Memory and Aging Project (ROSMAP), 1226 participants from the Accelerating Medicines Partnership - Alzheimers Disease (AMP-AD) Diverse Cohorts Study, and 735 participants from the Alzheimers Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). To characterise APOE {varepsilon}4 molecular effects, we analysed proteomic data from plasma, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC)-derived astrocytes and neurons, as well as transcriptomic and proteomic data from multiple brain regions. The association of APOE {varepsilon}4 with AD neuropathology was also examined. APOE {varepsilon}4 carriers shared a plasma proteomic signature enriched for immune processes, irrespective of AD diagnosis. A machine learning classifier trained on this signature discriminated APOE {varepsilon}4 carriers from non-carriers in an independent cohort using CSF proteomics. APOE {varepsilon}4 carriage was associated with higher Braak stages and Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimers Disease (CERAD) score. However, only limited APOE {varepsilon}4-associated transcriptomic and proteomic changes were observed in bulk brain tissue, with poor cross-layer concordance. Proteomic analyses of iPSC-derived astrocytes and neurons further revealed cell-type-specific APOE {varepsilon}4-associated changes. APOE {varepsilon}4 is associated with a consistent proteomic signature across plasma and CSF. Its molecular effects in the brain differ across cell types, brain regions and molecular layers. These findings support the need for cell-type-resolved multi-omic studies to elucidate how APOE {varepsilon}4 confers AD risk.

neuroscience↗