P3a amplitude is related to conclusion specificity during category-based induction.

Hong Wang,Ruifang Cui,Changquan Long,Peipeng Liang

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0229515

Abstract

Category-based induction involves the generalization of a novel property (conclusion property) to a new category (conclusion category), based on the knowledge that a category exemplar (premise category) has the respective novel property. Previous studies have shown that conclusion specificity (i.e., specific [S] or generic categories [G]) influences category-based induction. However, the timing of brain activity underlying this effect is not well known, especially with controlling the similarities of premise and conclusion categories between S and G arguments. In this study, the event-related potential (ERP) responses to category-based induction between S and G arguments were compared under both congruent (+, premise and conclusion categories are related) and incongruent (-, premise and conclusion categories are unrelated) arguments; additionally, the similarities of premise and conclusion categories between S and G arguments were controlled. The results showed that replicating this effect, S+ arguments have increased “strong” response rates compared to G+ arguments, suggesting that category-based induction is contingent on factors beyond matched similarities. Moreover, S arguments have more liberal inductive decision thresholds than G arguments, which suggest that conclusion specificity affects the inductive decision reflected by inductive decision thresholds. Furthermore, G+ arguments elicit greater P3a amplitudes than S+ arguments, which suggest greater attention resources allocation to the review of decisions for G+ arguments than that for S+ arguments. Taken together, the conclusion specificity effect during semantic category-based induction can be revealed by “strong” response rates, inductive decision thresholds, and P3a component after controlling the premise-conclusion similarity, providing evidence that category-based induction rely on more than simple similarity judgment and conclusion specificity would affect category-based induction.

Highlights

Category-based induction, which is essential to learning and using knowledge [1], involves the use of knowledge about categorical relationships to generalize novel properties from category exemplars [2]
The results showed that the effect of conclusion specificity on inductive decision during category-based induction is revealed by “strong” response rates, inductive decision thresholds, and P3a amplitudes
S+ arguments have increased “strong” response rates compared to G+ arguments, which replicates the effect of conclusion specificity on inductive decision and suggests that categorybased induction is contingent on factors beyond matched similarities

Summary

Introduction

Category-based induction, which is essential to learning and using knowledge [1], involves the use of knowledge about categorical relationships to generalize novel properties from category exemplars [2]. Learning that a hawthorn (premise category) contains molecular structure E5 (premise property) might lead one to infer that a fruit (conclusion category) contains molecular structure E5 (conclusion property). This process has been variously termed as “categorical induction,” “property induction,” “feature induction,” and “induction projection” [3]. A generalization that is made from a specific premise category to a more general conclusion category (G argument, e.g., inferring from “hawthorn has molecular structure E5” that “fruit has molecular structure E5”) is weaker than that which is made to a specific conclusion category, especially when the generic conclusion category includes the specific conclusion category (S argument, e.g., inferring from “hawthorn has molecular structure E5” that “jujube has molecular structure E5”) This is because the wider the range the conclusion category has, the larger the risk is that an erroneous generalization will be made

Results

Discussion

Conclusion