Cooper Richard
School of Psychology, Birkbeck College, University of London, Malet Street, London WC1E 7HX, UK.
Neurocase. 2002;8(1-2):61-79. doi: 10.1093/neucas/8.1.61.
This paper describes the contention scheduling/supervisory attentional system approach to action selection and uses this account to structure a survey of current theories of the control of action. The focus is on how such theories account for the types of error produced by some patients with frontal and/or left temporoparietal damage when attempting everyday tasks. Four issues, concerning both the theories and their accounts of everyday action breakdown, emerge: first, whether multiple control systems, each capable of controlling action in different situations, exist; second, whether different forms of damage at the neural level result in conceptually distinct disorders; third, whether semantic/conceptual knowledge of objects and actions can be dissociated from control mechanisms, and if so what computational principles govern sequential control; and fourth, whether disorders of everyday action should be attributed to a loss of semantic/conceptual knowledge, a malfunction of control, or some combination of the two.
本文描述了用于动作选择的竞争调度/监督注意系统方法，并运用这一观点对当前的动作控制理论进行综述。重点在于这些理论如何解释一些额叶和/或左侧颞顶叶受损患者在尝试日常任务时所产生的错误类型。出现了四个与理论及其对日常动作分解的解释相关的问题：第一，是否存在多个控制系统，每个系统都能够在不同情况下控制动作；第二，神经层面不同形式的损伤是否会导致概念上不同的障碍；第三，物体和动作的语义/概念知识是否能够与控制机制分离，如果可以，那么哪些计算原则支配序列控制；第四，日常动作障碍应归因于语义/概念知识的丧失、控制功能的故障，还是两者的某种组合。
