Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-09T00:48:02.707Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

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

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 October 2007

LAURA H.F. BARDE ,
LAUREL J. BUXBAUM  and
ADRIENNE D. MOLL
LAURA H.F. BARDE
Affiliation:
Moss Rehabilitation Research Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
LAUREL J. BUXBAUM
Affiliation:
Moss Rehabilitation Research Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
ADRIENNE D. MOLL
Affiliation:
Moss Rehabilitation Research Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We assessed the prediction that object structural cues could benefit the learning of object–action relationships in ideomotor apraxia (IMA). A total of 15 patients with left-hemisphere stroke, 11 of whom exhibited IMA, and 10 healthy subjects were trained to match novel gestures to novel tool pictures that were either High- or Low-Afforded by their associated tools. Learning was assessed with recognition and production tests. Only IMA patients demonstrated better recognition of High- than Low-Afforded gestures, and their recognition of High-Afforded gestures was statistically comparable to the other groups. This finding suggests that apraxics may rely abnormally on object structure when learning to associate novel gestures and tools. Finally, the “affordance benefit” was associated with relative sparing of structures in the dorsal visual processing stream. These data are consistent with the proposal that two routes may mediate skilled action, one specialized for stored information, and the other responsive to object structure, and that deficient gesture learning may be compensated by “bootstrapping” intact dorsal stream coding of action. (JINS, 2007, 13, 997–1008.)

Keywords

Ideomotor apraxiaGesturesParietal lobeRehabilitation
Type
SYMPOSIA
Information
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society , Volume 13 , Issue 6 , November 2007 , pp. 997 - 1008
Copyright
© 2007 The International Neuropsychological Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bekkering, H. & Neggers, S.F.W. (2002). Visual search is modulated by action intentions. Psychological Science, 13, 370–374.Google Scholar
Buccino, G., Vogt, S., Ritzl, A., Fink, G.R., Zilles, K., Freund, H.J., & Rizzolatti, G. (2004). Neural circuits underlying imitation learning of hand actions: An event-related fMRI study. Neuron, 42, 323–334.Google Scholar
Buxbaum, L.J. (2001). Ideomotor apraxia: A call to action. Neurocase, 7, 445–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buxbaum, L.J., Johnson-Frey, S.H., & Bartlett-Williams, M. (2005a). Deficient internal models for planning hand-object interactions in apraxia. Neuropsychologia, 43, 917–929.Google Scholar
Buxbaum, L.J., Kyle, K., & Menon, R. (2005b). On beyond mirror neurons: Internal representations subserving imitation and recognition of skilled object-related actions in humans. Cognitive Brain Research, 25, 226–239.Google Scholar
Buxbaum, L.J., Kyle, K.M., Tang, K., & Detre, J.M. (2006). Neural substrates of knowledge of hand postures for object grasping and functional object use: Evidence from fMRI. Brain Research, 1117, 175–185.Google Scholar
Buxbaum, L.J., Sirigu, A.S., Schwartz, M.F., & Klatsky, R. (2003). Cognitive representations of hand posture in ideomotor apraxia. Neuropsychologia, 41, 1091–1113.Google Scholar
Chao, L.L. & Martin, A. (2000). Representation of manipulable man-made objects in the dorsal stream. Neuroimage, 12, 478–484.Google Scholar
Clark, M.A., Merians, A.S., Kothari, A., Poizner, H., Macauley, B., & Rothi, L.J.G. (1994). Spatial planning deficits in limb apraxia. Brain, 117, 1093–1106.Google Scholar
Craighero, L., Fadiga, L., Rizzolatti, G., & Umilta, C. (1999). Action for perception: A motorvisual attentional effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1673–1692.Google Scholar
Creem-Regehr, S.H. & Lee, J.N. (2005). Neural representations of graspable objects: Are tools special? Cognitive Brain Research, 22, 457–469.Google Scholar
DeRenzi, E., Faglioni, P., & Sorgato, P. (1982). Modality-specific and supramodal mechanisms of apraxia. Brain, 105, 301–312.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. & Tucker, M. (2000). Micro-affordance: The potentiation of components of action by seen objects. British Journal of Psychology, 91, 451–471.Google Scholar
Fagg, A.H. & Arbib, M.A. (1998). Modeling parietal-premotor interactions in primate control of grasping. Neural Networks, 11, 1277–1303.Google Scholar
Fiez, J.A., Damasio, H., & Grabowski, T.J. (2000). Lesion segmentation and manual warping to a reference brain: Intra- and interobserver reliability. Human Brain Mapping, 9, 192–211.Google Scholar
Fogassi, L., Gallese, V., Fadiga, L., & Rizzolatti, G. (1998). Neurons responding to the sight of goal-directed hand/arm actions in the parietal area PF (7b) of the macaque monkey. Society of Neuroscience Abstracts, 24, 654.Google Scholar
Frey, S.H. (2007). What puts the how in where? Tool use and the divided visual streams hypothesis. Cortex, 43, 368–375.Google Scholar
Gallese, V., Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L., Luppino, G., & Murata, A. (1997). A parietal-frontal circuit for hand grasping movements in the monkey: Evidence from reversible inactivation experiments. In P. Their & H.-O. Karnath, (Eds.), Parietal lobe contributions to orientation in 3-D space. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Garbarini, F. & Adenzato, M. (2004). At the root of embodied cognition: Cognitive science meets neurophysiology. Brain and Cognition, 56, 100–106.Google Scholar
Gerardin, E., Sirigu, A., Lehericy, S., Poline, J., Gaymard, B., Agid, Y., & LeBihan, D. (2000). Partially overlapping neural networks for real and imagined hand movements. Cerebral Cortex, 10, 1093–1094.Google Scholar
Gibson, J.L. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton and Mifflin.
Goldenberg, G. & Hagmann, S. (1998). Tool use and mechanical problem solving in apraxia. Neuropsychologia, 36, 581–589.Google Scholar
Goldenberg, G., Hentze, S., & Hermsdorfer, J. (2004). The effect of tactile feedback on pantomime of tool use in apraxia. Neurology, 63, 1863–1867.Google Scholar
Gonzalez-Rothi, L.J. & Heilman, K.M. (1984). Acquisition and retention of gestures by apraxic patients. Brain & Cognition, 3, 426–437.Google Scholar
Grafton, S.T., Fadiga, L., Arbib, M.A., & Rizzolatti, G. (1997). Premotor cortex activation during observation and naming of familiar tools. Neuroimage, 6, 231–236.Google Scholar
Haaland, K.Y., Harrington, D.L., & Knight, R.T. (2000). Neural representations of skilled movement. Brain, 123, 2306–2313.Google Scholar
Hannus, A., Cornelissen, F.W., Lindemann, O., & Bekkering, H. (2005). Selection-for-action in visual search. Acta Psychologica, 118, 171–191.Google Scholar
Heilman, K.M. & Gonzalez-Rothi, L.J. (1993). Apraxia. In K.M. Heilman & E. Valenstein (Eds.), Clinical neuropsychology. New York: Oxford University Press.
Heilman, K.M., Gonzalez-Rothi, L.J., & Valenstein, E. (1982). Two forms of ideomotor apraxia. Neurology, 32, 342–346.Google Scholar
Hermsdorfer, J., Hentze, S., & Goldenberg, G. (2006). Spatial and kinematic features of apraxic movements depend on the mode of execution. Neuropsychologia, 44, 1642–1652.Google Scholar
Mecklinger, A., Gruenewald, C., Weiskopf, N., & Doeller, C.F. (2004). Motor affordance and its role for visual working memory: Evidence from fMRI studies. Experimental Psychology, 51, 258–269.Google Scholar
Milner, A.D., Dijkerman, H.C., Pisella, L., Mcintosh, R.D., Tilikete, C., Vighetto, A., & Rossetti, Y. (2001). Grasping the past: Delay can improve visuomotor performance. Current Biology, 11, 1896–1901.Google Scholar
Mozaz, M., Rothi, L.G, Anderson, J., Crucian, G.P., & Heilman, K. (2002). Postural knowledge of transitive pantomimes and intransitive gestures. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 8, 958–962.Google Scholar
Murata, A., Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L., Gallese, V., Raos, V., & Rizzolatti, G. (1997). Object representation in the ventral premotor cortex (area F5) of the monkey. Journal of Neurophysiology, 78, 2226–2230.Google Scholar
Murata, A., Gallese, V., Kaseda, M., & Sakata, H. (1996). Parietal neurons related to memory guided hand manipulation. Journal of Neurophysiology, 75, 2180–2186.Google Scholar
Murata, A., Gallese, V., Luppino, G., Kaseda, M., & Sakata, H. (2000). Selectivity for the shape, size, and orientation of objects for grasping in neurons of monkey parietal area AIP. Journal of Neurophysiology, 83, 2580–2601.Google Scholar
Norman, J. (2002). Two visual systems and two theories of perception: An attempt to reconcile the constructivist and ecological approaches. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25, 73–144.Google Scholar
Rizzolatti, G. & Fadiga, L. (1998). Grasping objects and grasping action meanings: The dual role of monkey rostroventral premotor cortex (area F5). Novartis Foundation Symposia, 218, 81–95.Google Scholar
Rizzolatti, G., Fogassi, L., & Gallese, V. (2002). Motor and cognitive functions of the ventral premotor cortex. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 12, 149–154.Google Scholar
Rizzolatti, G. & Luppino, G. (2001). The cortical motor system. Neuron, 31, 889–901.Google Scholar
Rizzolatti, G. & Matelli, M. (2003). Two different streams form the dorsal visual system: Anatomy and functions. Experimental Brain Research, 153, 146–157.Google Scholar
Rorden, C. & Brett, M. (2000). Stereotaxic display of brain lesions. Behavioral Neurology, 12, 191–200.Google Scholar
Schindler, I., Rice, N.J., McIntosh, R.D., Rossetti, Y., Vighetto, A., & Milner, D. (2004). Automatic avoidance of obstacles is a dorsal stream function: Evidence from optic ataxia. Nature Neuroscience, 7, 779–784.Google Scholar
Sirigu, A., Cohen, L., Duhamel, J.R., Pillon, B., Dubois, B., & Agid, Y. (1995). A selective impairment of hand posture for object utilization in apraxia. Cortex, 31, 41–55.Google Scholar
Symes, E., Ellis, R., & Tucker, M. (2007). Visual object affordances: Object orientation. Acta Psychologica, 124, 238–255.Google Scholar
Tucker, M. & Ellis, R. (1998). On the relations between seen objects and components of potential actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 830–846.Google Scholar
Wada, Y., Nakagawa, Y., Nishikawa, T., Aso, N., Inokawa, M., Kashiwagi, A., Tanabe, H., & Takeda, M. (1999). Role of somatosensory feedback from tools in realizing movements by patients with ideomotor apraxia. European Neurology, 41, 73–78.Google Scholar
Watson, R.T., Fleet, W.S., Rothi, L.J.G., & Heilman, K.M. (1986). Apraxia and the supplementary motor area. Archives of Neurology, 43, 787–792.Google Scholar
Young, G. (2006). Are different affordances subserved by different neural pathways? Brain and Cognition, 62, 134–142.Google Scholar