The Common And Distinct Of Neural Mechanism Of Relational Integration,Storage-Processing And Numerical Inductive Reasoning

There have been a lot of studies on rule acquisition and rule application in the process of numerical inductive reasoning,and the studies on neural mechanism about relational integration in the process of inductive reasoning.However,there are few studies on the similarities and differences between relational intecration and numerical inductive reasoning.At the same time.based on the facet theorv of working memory.storage processing and relational integration are the processes separate but closely related,researchers have discussed the function and role of the these two components in working memory.however whether the two processes involved in numerical inductive reasoning,as well as the specific temporal processing was elusive.In addition,the level of relational complexity can adjust the task difficulny,so the change in the decree of relational complexity will adjust the cognitive load of relational integration and numerical inductive reasoning.Above review present study aims to investigate the common and distinct of electrophysiological response patterns among numerical inductive reasoning.relational integration and storage processing.and to cfistinguishing the potential relational integration and storage processing.from the acquisition of complex rule learning.In experiment 1.we adopted the numerical sequential task to explore the common and distinct process of relational integration and numerical inductive reasoning under different levels of relational complexity.According to previous studies,numerical inductive reasoning is divuded into three sub-processes:rule searching,rule discoclzrte and rule following.The results showed that the relationsluip between relational integration and rule discovery have a high relevance.especially in the conflict detection(N200),uncertainty perception(P300)and expectancy violation(N400)process.In the time window of 480ms-730ms(LPC component),the rule discoveryunder 1-relational induced a larger amplitude than the relational integration.while the differcnce under 2-relational was not significant.which may be due to the relationship complexity level adjustment,Under the I-relational complexity,because the rule discovery involved the process of forming a new structure than the relational integration,and thus required more working memory updating,and the processing of 2-relational required a large amount of working memory,which induced a consistent amplitude between relational integration and rule discovery.(2)Relational integration and rule search shown significant amplitude differences on N200 and P300 but the differences of N400 and LPC were not significant,reflecting that relational integration and rule searching had different conflict detection and uncertainty perception.But they still had similar expectancy violation and working memory updating,(3)Relational integration and rule following were different at P300.N400 and LPC.The potential activities of them were distinct under 1-relational level,but similar under 2-relational level,indicating that the relational complexity level can regulate uncertainty,expectancy violation,and working memory updating,relational integration and rule following had similar cognitive processes under complex relational levels.In addition,relational complexity can adjust the common and distinct processes of relational integration and numerical inductive reasoning.which is reflected in the l-relational complexity,The identification of number rule is accompanied by the decline of uncertainty and induces the update of working memory,which is reflected in P300 and LPC,For 2-relational,the consistency of the three stages in relational integration and numerical inductive reasoning.which indicates that relational integration was not only consistent with rule discovery.but also with rule searching and rule following.The results show that the commonness of relational integration and inductive reasoning is closely related to rule discovery,and the differences among relational integration,rule searching and rule discovery are also the differences between relational integration and inductive reasoning.In experiment 2,we added the modified memory processing numerical sequential task to explore the common and distinct between numerical inductive reasoning,relational integration and storage-processing.Both the behavior and ERP data once again show that there are common neural activity patterns in relational integration and rule discovery,but they are different from rule searching and rule following,which verifies the results of experiment 1.Storage-processing and relational integration has a certain commonality,reflected in the similar N200,N400 and LPC components but the relational integration process feeling more uncertainty than storage processing,reflected in P300 amplitude.Results also found that although storage-processing is the basis of the rules discovery,but cannot completely explain rules discovery,because in N200,P300,N400 and LPC found significant differences,which explain rules discovery in conflict detection,feelings of uncertainty or insensitivity,expectancy violation and working memory updating is more complex than storage-processing and more advanced.In addition,it is also observed that the storage processing has common electrophysiological activities with the rule searching and rule following stages,indicating that storage-processing is an important basis for rule searching and rule following.Above all,storage-processing,the relationship between relation integration and numerical inductive reasoning on ERP components displays common and distinct in the time process,storage-processing and relationship integration is the core of the numerical inductive reasoning,reflecting that storage and processing is the core of rule searching and rule following,and relational integration is the core of rules discovery.In addition,relational complexity can adjust the process of numerical inductive reasoning and relational integration.