Deductive and inductive reasoning in Parkinson's disease patients and normal controls: review and experimental evidence

Abstract

In the present study, fifty-four subjects were tested; twenty-seven with idiopathic Parkinson's disease and twenty-seven normal controls matched in age, education, verbal ability, level of depression, sex and socio-economic status. The subjects were tested on eight tasks. Five of the tasks were the classic deductive reasoning syllogisms, modus ponens, modus tollendo tollens, affirming the consequent, denying the antecedent and three-term series problems phrased in a factual context (brief scripts). Three of the tasks were inductive reasoning, including logical inferences, metaphors and similes. All tasks were presented to subjects in a multiple choice format. The results, overall, have shown nonsignificant differences between the two groups in deductive and inductive reasoning, an ability traditionally associated with frontal lobes involvement. Of the comparisons performed between subgroups of the patients and normal controls concerning disease duration, disease onset and predominant involvement of the left and/or right hemisphere, significant differences were found between patients with earlier disease onset and normal controls and between bilaterally affected patients and normal controls, demonstrating an additive effect of lateralization to reasoning ability.