2004
DOI: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000144283.38174.07
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effect of tactile feedback on pantomime of tool use in apraxia

Abstract: The better performance of real than of pretended tool use does not depend on tactile feedback per se, but on the mechanical affordances and constraints of tools and objects transmitted by this feedback in real use. Tactile feedback deprived of these contents and restricted to the shape of the handle does not substantially help produce the appropriate action.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
40
0
1

Year Published

2006
2006
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 73 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
2
40
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Note that this may not preclude other aspects of tangibility from affecting tool processing. For example, patients with ideomotor apraxia who show deficits in pantomiming the appropriate actions for a particular tool when cued verbally ('show me how you would use a comb') perform better while holding the tool than without a tool or while holding only the handle (Goldenberg et al 2004).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Note that this may not preclude other aspects of tangibility from affecting tool processing. For example, patients with ideomotor apraxia who show deficits in pantomiming the appropriate actions for a particular tool when cued verbally ('show me how you would use a comb') perform better while holding the tool than without a tool or while holding only the handle (Goldenberg et al 2004).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the apraxic dissociation of unimpaired incidental motor sequence learning, when responding to the visually presented stimuli, and impaired free recall of the respective motor sequence, is in accordance with the clinical observation that apraxic patients generally perform better when external cues are provided. Tests of pantomime, which provide fewer cues than actual object use, are more sensitive to reveal apraxia-specific deficits in stroke patients (Goldenberg et al, 2004;Weiss et al, 2008).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These patients are commonly impaired in pantomiming and imitating object-related actions, such as hammering or sawing, when the object is not present (Buxbaum, Giovannetti, & Libom, 2000;Poizner et al, 1998) but perform more accurately with the object in hand (Goldenberg, Hentze, & Hermsdörfer, 2004;Heilman & Gonzalez Rothi, 1993). Previous explanations of this difference have focused on the additional tactile feedback available when objects are held (Poizner et al, 1998; but see Goldenberg et al, 2004, for conflicting evidence).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These patients are commonly impaired in pantomiming and imitating object-related actions, such as hammering or sawing, when the object is not present (Buxbaum, Giovannetti, & Libom, 2000;Poizner et al, 1998) but perform more accurately with the object in hand (Goldenberg, Hentze, & Hermsdörfer, 2004;Heilman & Gonzalez Rothi, 1993). Previous explanations of this difference have focused on the additional tactile feedback available when objects are held (Poizner et al, 1998; but see Goldenberg et al, 2004, for conflicting evidence). An alternative, although not mutually exclusive, explanation is that pantomime and imitation without an object are strongly weighted toward intrinsic control (e.g., specifying joint rotations at the shoulder and elbow to make a hammering motion), whereas object-related actions may be more strongly weighted toward extrinsic control (e.g., specifying the trajectory of the hammer through space).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%