Knowing "what for," but not "where": Dissociation between functional and contextual tool knowledge in healthy individuals and patients with dementia.

IF 2.6 4区 心理学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Josselin Baumard, Mathieu Lesourd, Christophe Jarry, Catherine Merck, Frédérique Etcharry-Bouyx, Valérie Chauviré, Serge Belliard, François Osiurak, Didier Le Gall
{"title":"Knowing \"what for,\" but not \"where\": Dissociation between functional and contextual tool knowledge in healthy individuals and patients with dementia.","authors":"Josselin Baumard, Mathieu Lesourd, Christophe Jarry, Catherine Merck, Frédérique Etcharry-Bouyx, Valérie Chauviré, Serge Belliard, François Osiurak, Didier Le Gall","doi":"10.1017/S1355617723000486","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Semantic tool knowledge underlies the ability to perform activities of daily living. Models of apraxia have emphasized the role of functional knowledge about the action performed with tools (e.g., a hammer and a mallet allow a \"hammering\" action), and contextual knowledge informing individuals about where to find tools in the social space (e.g., a hammer and a mallet can be found in a workshop). The goal of this study was to test whether contextual or functional knowledge, would be central in the organization of tool knowledge. It was assumed that contextual knowledge would be more salient than functional knowledge for healthy controls and that patients with dementia would show impaired contextual knowledge.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We created an original, open-ended categorization task with ambiguity, in which the same familiar tools could be matched on either contextual or functional criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In our findings, healthy controls prioritized a contextual, over a functional criterion. Patients with dementia had normal visual categorization skills (as demonstrated by an original picture categorization task), yet they made less contextual, but more functional associations than healthy controls.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings support a dissociation between functional knowledge (\"what for\") on the one hand, and contextual knowledge (\"where\") on the other hand. While functional knowledge may be distributed across semantic and action-related factors, contextual knowledge may actually be the name of higher-order social norms applied to tool knowledge. These findings may encourage researchers to test both functional and contextual knowledge to diagnose semantic deficits and to use open-ended categorization tests.</p>","PeriodicalId":49995,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society","volume":" ","pages":"97-106"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617723000486","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Semantic tool knowledge underlies the ability to perform activities of daily living. Models of apraxia have emphasized the role of functional knowledge about the action performed with tools (e.g., a hammer and a mallet allow a "hammering" action), and contextual knowledge informing individuals about where to find tools in the social space (e.g., a hammer and a mallet can be found in a workshop). The goal of this study was to test whether contextual or functional knowledge, would be central in the organization of tool knowledge. It was assumed that contextual knowledge would be more salient than functional knowledge for healthy controls and that patients with dementia would show impaired contextual knowledge.

Methods: We created an original, open-ended categorization task with ambiguity, in which the same familiar tools could be matched on either contextual or functional criteria.

Results: In our findings, healthy controls prioritized a contextual, over a functional criterion. Patients with dementia had normal visual categorization skills (as demonstrated by an original picture categorization task), yet they made less contextual, but more functional associations than healthy controls.

Conclusion: The findings support a dissociation between functional knowledge ("what for") on the one hand, and contextual knowledge ("where") on the other hand. While functional knowledge may be distributed across semantic and action-related factors, contextual knowledge may actually be the name of higher-order social norms applied to tool knowledge. These findings may encourage researchers to test both functional and contextual knowledge to diagnose semantic deficits and to use open-ended categorization tests.

知道 "做什么",但不知道 "在哪里":健康人和痴呆症患者的功能性工具知识与情境性工具知识之间的分离。
目的:语义工具知识是日常生活活动能力的基础:语义工具知识是日常生活能力的基础。失语症模型强调了使用工具进行动作的功能性知识(例如,锤子和槌子可以进行 "锤击 "动作)和告知个体在社会空间中何处可以找到工具的语境性知识(例如,锤子和槌子可以在车间中找到)的作用。本研究的目的是检验在工具知识的组织过程中,是语境知识还是功能知识起着核心作用。我们假设健康对照组的语境知识比功能知识更突出,而痴呆症患者的语境知识会受损:方法:我们创建了一个原创的、开放式的、具有模糊性的分类任务,在这个任务中,相同的熟悉工具可以根据情境或功能标准进行匹配:结果:根据我们的研究结果,健康对照组优先考虑情境标准,而非功能标准。痴呆症患者的视觉分类能力正常(如原始图片分类任务所示),但与健康对照组相比,他们的语境关联较少,而功能关联较多:研究结果表明,功能性知识("做什么")与情境性知识("在哪里")之间存在差异。功能性知识可能分布在语义和行动相关因素中,而情境性知识实际上可能是应用于工具知识的高阶社会规范的名称。这些发现可能会鼓励研究人员同时测试功能知识和语境知识,以诊断语义缺陷,并使用开放式分类测试。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.80%
发文量
185
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society is the official journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, an organization of over 4,500 international members from a variety of disciplines. The Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society welcomes original, creative, high quality research papers covering all areas of neuropsychology. The focus of articles may be primarily experimental, applied, or clinical. Contributions will broadly reflect the interest of all areas of neuropsychology, including but not limited to: development of cognitive processes, brain-behavior relationships, adult and pediatric neuropsychology, neurobehavioral syndromes (such as aphasia or apraxia), and the interfaces of neuropsychology with related areas such as behavioral neurology, neuropsychiatry, genetics, and cognitive neuroscience. Papers that utilize behavioral, neuroimaging, and electrophysiological measures are appropriate. To assure maximum flexibility and to promote diverse mechanisms of scholarly communication, the following formats are available in addition to a Regular Research Article: Brief Communication is a shorter research article; Rapid Communication is intended for "fast breaking" new work that does not yet justify a full length article and is placed on a fast review track; Case Report is a theoretically important and unique case study; Critical Review and Short Review are thoughtful considerations of topics of importance to neuropsychology and include meta-analyses; Dialogue provides a forum for publishing two distinct positions on controversial issues in a point-counterpoint format; Special Issue and Special Section consist of several articles linked thematically; Letter to the Editor responds to recent articles published in the Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society; and Book Review, which is considered but is no longer solicited.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信