Cited by 171Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skillsNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismCategorization, perception, and language

Thought Beyond Language: Neural Dissociation of Algebra and Natural Language

Monti, Martin M., Parsons, Lawrence M., Osherson, Daniel N.·2012·Psychological Science

Abstract

A central question in cognitive science is whether natural language provides combinatorial operations that are essential to diverse domains of thought. In the study reported here, we addressed this issue by examining the role of linguistic mechanisms in forging the hierarchical structures of algebra. In a 3-T functional MRI experiment, we showed that processing of the syntax-like operations of algebra does not rely on the neural mechanisms of natural language. Our findings indicate that processing the syntax of language elicits the known substrate of linguistic competence, whereas algebraic operations recruit bilateral parietal brain regions previously implicated in the representation of magnitude. This double dissociation argues against the view that language provides the structure of thought across all cognitive domains.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0956797612437427

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Neuroimaging studies have consistently shown that the language network remains largely inactive during various reasoning tasks.

    “Neuroimaging studies have consistently shown that the language network -a set of brain regions responsible for language comprehension and production -remains largely inactive during various reasoning tasks”

    From Training Large Language Models to Reason in a Continuous Latent Space (2024) · cites this paper as Monti et al., 2012

  • fMRI reveals that the language network responds reliably when people listen to, read, or generate sentences, but not when they perform arithmetic tasks, engage in logical reasoning, understand computer programs, listen to music, categorize objects or events, reason about people's mental states, or process non-verbal communicative information like facial expressions or gestures.

    “it responds reliably when people listen to, read, or generate sentences, but not when they perform arithmetic tasks, engage in logical reasoning, understand computer programs, listen to music, categorize objects or events, reason about people’s mental states, or process non-verbal communicative information like facial expressions or gestures [37, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48].”

    From Dissociating language and thought in large language models (2024) · cites this paper as [47]

  • The multiple demand network supports reasoning even when the task is presented linguistically.

    “Importantly, the multiple demand network supports reasoning even when the task is presented linguistically [41, 47, 140]”

    From Dissociating language and thought in large language models (2024) · cites this paper as [47]

  • The multiple demand network is engaged in logic, mathematical reasoning, physical reasoning, and computer code comprehension.

    “these regions are engaged in many cognitively demanding tasks: logic [47], mathematical reasoning [41], physical reasoning [139], and computer code comprehension [46, 140].”

    From Dissociating language and thought in large language models (2024) · cites this paper as [47]

  • Previous studies have shown that sentences with content words lead to larger responses in the perisylvian fronto-temporal language network than spoken equations or logical statements with variables.

    “Although all of the tasks in the language/math/logic localizer contain language stimuli, previous studies have shown that sentences with content words lead to larger responses in the perisylvian fronto-temporal language network than spoken equations or logical statements with variables (Kanjlia et al., 2016; Monti et al., 2009; Monti et al., 2012).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 40 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Monti, M. M., Parsons, L. M., & Osherson, D. N.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
  • Princeton University (US)
Venue
Psychological Science
Published
2012-07-03
Volume
23
Issue
8
Pages
914-922
ISSN
  • 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9280
OpenAlex
W2107698275
Cited by
171
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
FWCI
7.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
Keywords
natural language, combinatorial operations, language and thought, parietal cortex, numerical magnitude representation, double dissociation, mathematical cognition
MeSH terms
Brain, Brain Mapping, Cognition, Female, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Language, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Mathematics, Parietal Lobe, Temporal Lobe, Thinking, Functional Neuroimaging

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review