Unusual use of objects after unilateral brain damage. The technical reasoning model

Abstract

It has been suggested that gesture engrams, conceptual knowledge and/or the ability to infer function from structure can support object use. The present paper proposes an alternative view which is based upon the idea that object use requires solely the ability to reason about technical means provided by objects. Technical means are abstract principles which are not linked with any object representation (e.g., cutting involves the opposition between dense and permeable material). The technical reasoning model predicts that the inability to perform technical reasoning should impair performance in any situation requiring the use of objects (in a conventional way or not). Twenty left brain-damaged (LBD) patients, 11 right brain-damaged (RBD) patients and 41 healthy controls were examined on experimental tests assessing the conventional use of objects (e.g., screwing a screw with a screwdriver), conceptual knowledge about object function, pantomime of object use and recognition of object utilization gestures. We also designed the Unusual Use of Objects Test, which demands unusual applications of objects to achieve a purpose for which the usually applied object is not provided (e.g., screwing a screw with a knife). The key findings are that only LBD patients have more difficulties on the Unusual Use of Objects Test than controls or RBD patients, and that the severity of their impairment is correlated with that on conventional use of objects. Correlations with tests assessing conceptual knowledge as well as with tests of pantomime of object use and recognition of object utilization gestures were weaker. These results support the technical reasoning model and question the role of conceptual knowledge and gesture engrams in object use. Since the technical reasoning model also predicts two distinct technical disorders, the discussion focuses on the existence of these disorders in regard to individual performance profiles obtained in the Unusual Use of Objects Test.

A validated set of tool pictures with matched objects and non-objects for laterality research

“…Also, Goldenberg & Spatt (2009) observed that parietal lesions involving the left supramarginal gyrus impaired tool use (both common and new) and left frontal lesions affected tool use and tool knowledge. Further, Osiurak et al (2009) found that left brain damaged patients had more difficulties on the unusual use of objects when compared to healthy controls or right brain damaged patients. Finally, Goldenberg, Hermsdorfer, Glindemann, Rorden, and Karnath (2007) examined 44 patients with left sided cerebrovascular accidents, and found that lesions in the inferior frontal gyrus and adjacent portions of the insula and precentral gyrus led to defective pantomiming ability.…”

A neuropsychological perspective on the link between language and praxis in modern humans

“…For example, apraxic patients may exhibit deficits that are linked to non-linguistic processes, such as mechanical reasoning. Indeed, they often have difficulties in solving mechanical puzzles, which require inferring the function of a tool or of an object solely from its structure [142], or in technical reasoning [143]. Thus, praxis implies some left lateralized cognitive ability important for actual tool use but independent from linguistic capacity.…”

How similar are nut-cracking and stone-flaking? A functional approach to percussive technology

“…Hence tool use is often regarded primarily as a product of intrinsic capacities, developed through the evolutionary process and manifested by anatomical structures and neurological mechanisms [43][44][45]. Adaptive behaviour such as tool use, however, implies somewhat more than this.…”