Abnormal reliance on object structure in apraxics' learning of novel object-related actions

Barde, Laura H.F.; Buxbaum, Laurel J.; Moll, Adrienne D.

doi:10.1017/s1355617707070981

Cited by 29 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Specific to the current work, damage to superior temporal cortex has been associated with a selective loss of tool-related knowledge (Tranel et al, 1997a). This is supported by clinical studies which show apraxic patients with lesions focused at superior temporal gyrus benefit from high levels of object affordance in gesture recognition (Barde et al, 2007). In other words, damage to superior temporal areas in the presence of spared dorsal areas specifically impacts the understanding of tool function.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Why is that Hammer in My Coffee? A Multimodal Imaging Investigation of Contextually Based Tool Understanding

Mizelle¹,

Wheaton²

2010

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Appropriate tool–object pairing is a natural part of our lives. When preparing to stir coffee, we know that a hammer is useful for some tasks but that it is not appropriate in this behavioral context. The neural correlates of this context–tool pairing process remain unclear. In the current work, we used event-related electroencephalography (EEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to determine neural correlates for differentiating contextually correct and incorrect tool use. Subjects were shown images depicting correct (e.g., spoon used to stir coffee) or incorrect (e.g., hammer used to stir coffee) tool use. We identified distinct regional and temporal activations for identifying incorrect versus correct tool use. The posterior cingulate, insula, and superior temporal gyrus preferentially differentiated incorrect tool–object usage, while occipital, parietal, and frontal areas were active in identifying correct tool use. Source localized EEG analysis confirmed the fMRI data and showed phases of activation, where incorrect tool-use activation (0–200 ms) preceded occipitotemporal activation for correct tool use (300–400 ms). This work extends our previous findings to better identify the neural substrate for contextual evaluation of tool use, and may contribute to our understanding of neurological disorders resulting in tool-use deficits.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Why is that Hammer in My Coffee? A Multimodal Imaging Investigation of Contextually Based Tool Understanding

Mizelle¹,

Wheaton²

2010

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A study from our laboratory (Barde, Buxbaum, & Moll, 2007) (reviewed by O + B) provides evidence that at least some apraxics exhibit deficits in motor learning, and abnormal reliance on affordances during learning. Patients with left hemisphere stroke, with and without apraxia, were trained to perform and recognize the actions associated with novel tools over multiple trials.…”

Section: Evidence Claimed By Osiurak and Badets As Contrary To The mentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning, remembering, and predicting how to use tools: Distributed neurocognitive mechanisms: Comment on Osiurak and Badets (2016).

Buxbaum¹

2017

Psychological Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The reasoning-based approach championed by Francois Osiurak and Arnaud Badets (Osiurak & Badets, 2016) denies the existence of sensory-motor memories of tool use except in limited circumstances, and suggests instead that most tool use is subserved solely by online technical reasoning about tool properties. In this commentary, I highlight the strengths and limitations of the reasoning-based approach and review a number of lines of evidence that manipulation knowledge is in fact used in tool action tasks. In addition, I present a “two route” neurocognitive model of tool use called the “Two Action Systems Plus (2AS+)” framework that posits a complementary role for online and stored information and specifies the neurocognitive substrates of task-relevant action selection. This framework, unlike the reasoning based approach, has the potential to integrate the existing psychological and functional neuroanatomic data in the tool use domain.

show abstract

“…Several patient studies have illustrated dissociations between mechanical problem solving skills and action semantics on object use [Bartolo et al, 2007;Goldenberg and Hagmann, 1998;Hodges et al, 2000]. Recent research on the learning of novel objectrelated actions has indeed shown that patients with IMA benefit from the affordance of the gesture compared to non-IMA patients and normal controls, suggesting that IMA patients are strongly reliant on object structure in gesture recognition [Barde et al, 2007]. These studies suggest that the human ability to work with tools and objects is reliant on different neural entities that each contribute to an adequate tool-to-goal related behavior and, when damaged, may be (partly) compensated by the intact parts of the network.…”

Section: Pantomiming the Use Of Familiar Versus Unfamiliar Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural correlates of pantomiming familiar and unfamiliar tools: Action semantics versus mechanical problem solving?

Vingerhoets

Vandekerckhove

Honoré

et al. 2011

Human Brain Mapping

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to reveal the neural correlates of planning and executing tool use pantomimes and explores the brain's response to pantomiming the use of unfamiliar tools. Sixteen right-handed volunteers planned and executed pantomimes of equally graspable familiar and unfamiliar tools while undergoing fMRI. During the planning of these pantomimes, we found bilateral temporo-occipital and predominantly left hemispheric frontal and parietal activation. The execution of the pantomimes produced additional activation in frontal and sensorimotor regions. In the left posterior parietal region both familiar and unfamiliar tool pantomimes elicit peak activity in the anterior portion of the lateral bank of the intraparietal sulcus--A region associated with the representation of action goals. The cerebral activation during these pantomimes is remarkably similar for familiar and unfamiliar tools, and direct comparisons revealed only few differences. First, the left cuneus is significantly active during the planning of pantomimes of unfamiliar tools, reflecting increased visual processing of the novel objects. Second, executing (but not planning) familiar tool pantomimes showed significant activation on the convex portion of the inferior parietal lobule, a region believed to serve as a repository for skilled object-related gestures. Given the striking similarity in brain activation while pantomiming familiar and unfamiliar tools, we argue that normal subjects use both action semantics and function from structure inferences simultaneously and interactively to give rise to flexible object-to-goal directed behavior.

show abstract

Abnormal reliance on object structure in apraxics' learning of novel object-related actions

Cited by 29 publications

References 44 publications

Why is that Hammer in My Coffee? A Multimodal Imaging Investigation of Contextually Based Tool Understanding

Why is that Hammer in My Coffee? A Multimodal Imaging Investigation of Contextually Based Tool Understanding

Learning, remembering, and predicting how to use tools: Distributed neurocognitive mechanisms: Comment on Osiurak and Badets (2016).

Neural correlates of pantomiming familiar and unfamiliar tools: Action semantics versus mechanical problem solving?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About