Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T07:19:04.455Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The case of the unfamiliar implement: Schema-based over-riding of semantic knowledge from objects in everyday action

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 October 2007

WAI-LING BICKERTON ,
GLYN W. HUMPHREYS  and
M. JANE RIDDOCH
WAI-LING BICKERTON
Affiliation:
Behavioural Brain Sciences, School of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
GLYN W. HUMPHREYS
Affiliation:
Behavioural Brain Sciences, School of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
M. JANE RIDDOCH
Affiliation:
Behavioural Brain Sciences, School of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We examined the role of schema knowledge in everyday action by assessing the use of unfamiliar implements by patients with subcortical and frontal lobe damage. Although the patients were relatively good at naming or showing how the unfamiliar implements could be used outside of the task context, the patients omitted using the objects in everyday life tasks more often than control participants—either omitting the action step involving the objects or performing the action using a familiar object that was not normally used for this purpose. The data suggest that knowledge about objects in the context of a task can play a determining role in how objects are used in everyday action. In patients with reduced attentional resources, the task schema can over-ride weak bottom-up cueing of action from the objects, with the result that unfamiliar implements are not used. (JINS, 2007, 13, 1035–1046.)

Keywords

Action disorganization syndromeEveryday actionsObject and action recognitionAction schemaSemantic knowledgeObject omissionFamiliarity
Type
SYMPOSIA
Information
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society , Volume 13 , Issue 6 , November 2007 , pp. 1035 - 1046
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

Bickerton, W.L., Humphreys, G.W., & Riddoch, M.J. (2006). The use of memorised verbal scripts in the rehabilitation of action disorganisation syndrome. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 16, 155–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buxbaum, L., Schwartz, M.F., & Carew, T.G. (1997). The role of semantic memory in object use. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 14, 219–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, R. (2002). Order and disorder in everyday action: The roles of contention scheduling and supervising attention. Neurocase, 8, 61–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, R., Schwartz, M.F., Yule, P.G., & Shallice, T. (2005). The simulation of action disorganisation in complex activities of daily living. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22, 959–1004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forde, E.M.E. & Humphreys, G.W. (2000). The role of semantic knowledge and working memory in everyday tasks. Brain and Cognition, 44, 214–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forde, E.M.E. & Humphreys, G.W. (2002). The role of semantic knowledge in short term memory. Neurocase, 8, 13–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forde, E.M.E., Humphreys, G.W., & Remoundou, M. (2004). Disordered knowledge of action order in action disorganization syndrome. Neurocase, 10, 19–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Funnell, E. (2001). Evidence for scripts in semantic dementia: Implications for theories of semantic memory. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 18, 323–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, K.S., Lambon Ralph, M.A., & Hodges, J.R. (1999). A questionable semantics: The interaction between semantic knowledge and autobiographical experience in semantic dementia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 16, 689–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphreys, G.W. & Forde, E.M.E. (1998). Disordered action schema and action disorganisation syndrome. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 15, 771–812.Google Scholar
Humphreys, G.W., Forde, E.M.E., & Riddoch, M.J. (2001). The neuropsychology of everyday actions. In B. Rapp (Ed.), The handbook of cognitive neuropsychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Humphreys, G.W. & Riddoch, M.J. (2003). From vision to action, and action to vision: A convergent route approach to vision, action and attention. In D. Irwin & B. Ross (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Visual cognition, Vol. 42 (pp. 226–264). New York: Academic Press.
Humphreys, G.W., Riddoch, M.J., & Price, C.J. (1997). Top-down processes in object identification: Evidence from experimental psychology, neuropsychology and functional anatomy. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 352, 1275–1282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joe, W., Ferraro, M., & Schwartz, M.F. (2002). Sequencing and interleaving in routine action production. Neurocase, 8, 135–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norman, D.A. & Shallice, T. (1986). Attention to action: Willed and automatic control of behaviour. In R.J. Davidson, G.E. Schwartz, & D. Shapiro (Eds.), Consciousness and self regulation. New York: Plenum Press.
Riddoch, M.J., Humphreys, G.W., Heslop, J., & Castermans, E. (2002). Dissociations between object knowledge and everyday action. Neurocase, 8, 100–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rumiati, R.I., Zanini, S., Vorano, L., & Shallice, T. (2001). A form of ideational apraxia as a selective deficit of contention scheduling. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 18, 617–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, M.F. (2006). The cognitive neuropsychology of everyday action and planning. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 23, 202–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, M.F., Montgomery, M.W., Buxbaum, L.J., Lee, S.S., Carew, T.G., Coslett, H.B., Ferraro, M., Fitzpatrick-DeSalme, E., Hart, T., & Mayer, N. (1998). Naturalistic action impairment in closed head injury. Neuropsychology, 12, 13–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, M.F., Montgomery, M., Fizpatrick-DeSalme, E.J., Ochipa, C., Coslett, H.B., & Mayer, N.H. (1995). Analysis of a disorder of everyday action. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 12, 863–892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, M.F., Reed, E.S., Montgomery, M.W., Palmer, C., & Mayer, N.H. (1991). The quantitative description of action disorganisation after brain damage: A case study. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 8, 381–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snowden, J.S., Griffiths, H., & Neary, D. (1994). Semantic dementia: Autobiographical contribution to preservation of meaning. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 11, 265–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar