Osiurak François, Jarry Christophe, Allain Philippe, Aubin Ghislaine, Etcharry-Bouyx Frédérique, Richard Isabelle, Bernard Isabelle, Le Gall Didier
Laboratory of Psychology UPRES EA 2646, University of Angers, France.
Cortex. 2009 Jun;45(6):769-83. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2008.06.013. Epub 2008 Nov 8.
It has been suggested that gesture engrams, conceptual knowledge and/or the ability to infer function from structure can support object use. The present paper proposes an alternative view which is based upon the idea that object use requires solely the ability to reason about technical means provided by objects. Technical means are abstract principles which are not linked with any object representation (e.g., cutting involves the opposition between dense and permeable material). The technical reasoning model predicts that the inability to perform technical reasoning should impair performance in any situation requiring the use of objects (in a conventional way or not). Twenty left brain-damaged (LBD) patients, 11 right brain-damaged (RBD) patients and 41 healthy controls were examined on experimental tests assessing the conventional use of objects (e.g., screwing a screw with a screwdriver), conceptual knowledge about object function, pantomime of object use and recognition of object utilization gestures. We also designed the Unusual Use of Objects Test, which demands unusual applications of objects to achieve a purpose for which the usually applied object is not provided (e.g., screwing a screw with a knife). The key findings are that only LBD patients have more difficulties on the Unusual Use of Objects Test than controls or RBD patients, and that the severity of their impairment is correlated with that on conventional use of objects. Correlations with tests assessing conceptual knowledge as well as with tests of pantomime of object use and recognition of object utilization gestures were weaker. These results support the technical reasoning model and question the role of conceptual knowledge and gesture engrams in object use. Since the technical reasoning model also predicts two distinct technical disorders, the discussion focuses on the existence of these disorders in regard to individual performance profiles obtained in the Unusual Use of Objects Test.
有人提出，手势记忆痕迹、概念知识和/或从结构推断功能的能力可以支持物体的使用。本文提出了一种不同的观点，该观点基于这样一种理念，即物体的使用仅需要对物体所提供的技术手段进行推理的能力。技术手段是抽象的原则，与任何物体表征都没有关联（例如，切割涉及致密材料和可渗透材料之间的对立）。技术推理模型预测，无法进行技术推理会损害在任何需要使用物体的情况下（无论是否以传统方式）的表现。对20名左脑损伤（LBD）患者、11名右脑损伤（RBD）患者和41名健康对照者进行了实验测试，评估物体的传统使用（例如，用螺丝刀拧螺丝）、关于物体功能的概念知识、物体使用的手势以及对物体使用手势的识别。我们还设计了物体异常使用测试，该测试要求对物体进行异常应用以实现一个目的，而通常应用的物体并不能达到该目的（例如，用刀拧螺丝）。关键发现是，只有LBD患者在物体异常使用测试中比对照组或RBD患者有更多困难，并且他们损伤的严重程度与物体传统使用方面的困难程度相关。与评估概念知识的测试以及与物体使用手势和物体使用手势识别测试的相关性较弱。这些结果支持了技术推理模型，并对概念知识和手势记忆痕迹在物体使用中的作用提出了质疑。由于技术推理模型还预测了两种不同的技术障碍，讨论集中在这些障碍在物体异常使用测试中获得的个体表现概况方面的存在情况。
