Literature DB >> 15557503

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

G Goldenberg1, S Hentze, J Hermsdörfer.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether apraxic patients' better performance with real tools compared to miming is due to the tactile feedback provided by holding the tool.
METHODS: Ten patients with aphasia and apraxia from left hemisphere damage were asked to demonstrate the use of 12 tools and objects under three conditions: miming with empty hands, miming with an implement shaped like the handle of the tool, and using the real tool with its corresponding object.
RESULTS: Whereas real tool use was much better than pantomime in all patients, tactile feedback from the isolated handle facilitated miming only in some and deteriorated it in others so that across the group there was no significant improvement.
CONCLUSIONS: 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.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15557503     DOI: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000144283.38174.07

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurology        ISSN: 0028-3878            Impact factor:   9.910


  17 in total

1.  Apraxia impairs intentional retrieval of incidentally acquired motor knowledge.

Authors:  Anna Dovern; Gereon R Fink; Jochen Saliger; Hans Karbe; Iring Koch; Peter H Weiss
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  A common network in the left cerebral hemisphere represents planning of tool use pantomimes and familiar intransitive gestures at the hand-independent level.

Authors:  Gregory Króliczak; Scott H Frey
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2009-01-30       Impact factor: 5.357

Review 3.  Apraxia and Alzheimer's disease: review and perspectives.

Authors:  Mathieu Lesourd; Didier Le Gall; Josselin Baumard; Bernard Croisile; Christophe Jarry; François Osiurak
Journal:  Neuropsychol Rev       Date:  2013-08-01       Impact factor: 7.444

4.  Gesture subtype-dependent left lateralization of praxis planning: an event-related fMRI study.

Authors:  S Bohlhalter; N Hattori; L Wheaton; E Fridman; E A Shamim; G Garraux; M Hallett
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2008-09-16       Impact factor: 5.357

5.  Critical brain regions for tool-related and imitative actions: a componential analysis.

Authors:  Laurel J Buxbaum; Allison D Shapiro; H Branch Coslett
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2014-04-27       Impact factor: 13.501

6.  Tool use without a tool: kinematic characteristics of pantomiming as compared to actual use and the effect of brain damage.

Authors:  Joachim Hermsdörfer; Yong Li; Jennifer Randerath; Georg Goldenberg; Leif Johannsen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-02-16       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Shared and Distinct Neuroanatomic Regions Critical for Tool-related Action Production and Recognition: Evidence from 131 Left-hemisphere Stroke Patients.

Authors:  Leyla Y Tarhan; Christine E Watson; Laurel J Buxbaum
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2015-09-09       Impact factor: 3.225

8.  Priming tool actions: Are real objects more effective primes than pictures?

Authors:  Scott D Squires; Scott N Macdonald; Jody C Culham; Jacqueline C Snow
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-12-21       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Memory for pantomimed actions versus actions with real objects.

Authors:  Ava J Senkfor
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2007-12-23       Impact factor: 4.027

Review 10.  What neuropsychology tells us about human tool use? The four constraints theory (4CT): mechanics, space, time, and effort.

Authors:  François Osiurak
Journal:  Neuropsychol Rev       Date:  2014-04-11       Impact factor: 7.444

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.