Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Brain-based mechanisms underlying complex causal thinking.

Jonathan A Fugelsang1, Kevin N Dunbar

  • 1Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755, USA.

Neuropsychologia
|April 9, 2005
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Everyone I Don't Like Is Biased: Affective Evaluations and the Bias Blind Spot.

Personality & social psychology bulletin·2026
Same author

Disclosing sample bias fails to fully correct judgments of partisan extremity.

Cognition·2025
Same author

Partisan language in a polarized world: In-group language provides reputational benefits to speakers while polarizing audiences.

Cognition·2024
Same author

Social and moral psychology of COVID-19 across 69 countries.

Scientific data·2023
Same author

Push Outcomes Bias Perceptions of Scratch Card Games.

Journal of gambling studies·2022
Same author

Author Correction: National identity predicts public health support during a global pandemic.

Nature communications·2022
Same journal

Prevalence and modulation of rat off-track head scanning on linear tracks: possible implications for representational and dynamic properties of hippocampal place cells.

Neuropsychologia·2026
Same journal

Identifying networks within an fMRI multivariate searchlight analysis.

Neuropsychologia·2026
Same journal

Modulating sentence comprehension in people with aphasia through anodal tDCS: A double-blind randomized cross-over study.

Neuropsychologia·2026
Same journal

Deficient processing of regularity violations during visuospatial neglect: a visual mismatch negativity study.

Neuropsychologia·2026
Same journal

Seeing is believing: mental imagery amplifies moral, emotional, and motivational responding to mentally constructed hypothetical events.

Neuropsychologia·2026
Same journal

From Past Recall to Future Projection: What Does Verb Tense Production Reveal About Mental Time Travel in Alzheimer's disease?

Neuropsychologia·2026
See all related articles

This study reveals how the brain integrates evidence with causal theories using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Plausible theories engage specific brain regions, influencing how we process supporting or contradicting data.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Neuroimaging

Background:

  • Causal reasoning is fundamental to human cognition.
  • Understanding the neural basis of belief updating and evidence integration is crucial.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the neural mechanisms underlying biases in causal reasoning.
  • To examine how the brain integrates evidence with plausible versus implausible causal theories.

Main Methods:

  • Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) was employed to measure brain activity.
  • Behavioral analyses were conducted alongside neuroimaging.
  • Participants evaluated data in relation to plausible and implausible causal theories.

Main Results:

  • Evaluating plausible theories, compared to implausible ones, selectively activated prefrontal and occipital cortices.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Theory plausibility modulated neural recruitment based on data consistency.
  • Data consistent with plausible theories activated the parahippocampal gyrus.
  • Data inconsistent with plausible theories activated the anterior cingulate, left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, and precuneus.

    • Conclusions:

    • The findings suggest a neural basis for integrating working hypotheses with evidence.
    • Distinct brain regions are involved in processing consistent versus inconsistent evidence for plausible causal theories.