Large Language Models (LLMs) aligned via outcome-based Reinforcement Learning (RL) frequently exhibit a critical failure mode: they achieve high performance on in-distribution benchmarks while demonstrating brittle reasoning capabilities on out-of-distribution (OOD) tasks.We term this phenomenon Reward-Induced Manifold Collapse.We establish a theoretical framework bridging Structural Causal Models (SCM) and the Information Bottleneck (IB) principle to explain this paradox.We define reasoning as a high-complexity causal process and shortcut learning as the exploitation of low-complexity spurious correlations.Under the implicit inductive bias of Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD), models optimized for outcome rewards are biased toward shortcut solutions whenever the training distribution allows for a "Markovian Screening" of the true causal mechanism.We derive a new generalization bound based on Semantic Coverage Measure (η) rather than sample size, showing why data scaling on homogeneous distributions may fail to correct reasoning flaws.We also show that Process Reward Models (PRMs) function as Topological Filters, enforcing stepwise mutual information constraints that render the low-complexity shortcut manifold inadmissible.These results provide a mathematical grounding for the role of process supervision beyond simple credit assignment.