Cogn Neuropsychol. 2001 Sep;18(7):617-42. doi: 10.1080/02643290126375.
In this paper we studied three brain-damaged patients: the first two, DR and FG, had limb apraxia whilst the third was a control patient (WH2) with an executive function disorder but without limb apraxia. DR and FG were impaired in carrying out everyday actions, whilst they maintained the ability to sequence photographs representing those same activities. The failure in the action production task was not caused by visual agnosia for objects, as the patients could recognise them from sight. Nor was it produced by a loss of knowledge about their functions (De Renzi & Lucchelli, 1988), as DR and FG could identify objects from descriptions of their use. WH2's pattern of performance doubly dissociated from that of the apraxic patients, namely spared action production on the multiple object test, but faulty sequencing of photographs. WH2's difficulties in sequencing photographs were not due to a failure to understand the task, as she could sequence stimuli other than actions (e.g., shapes and numbers). Nor were the differences due to a loss of knowledge about the actions, since she could perform and identify them from photographs. These results show that the kind of apraxia observed in DR and FG is not produced by a degraded action sequence representation (Lehmkuhl & Poeck, 1981; Poeck & Lehmkuhl, 1980). We interpreted our results within a contention scheduling model (Cooper & Shallice, 2000; Norman & Shallice, 1986).
在本文中,我们研究了三位脑损伤患者:前两位,DR 和 FG,患有肢体失用症,而第三位是一位执行功能障碍但没有肢体失用症的对照患者(WH2)。DR 和 FG 在执行日常动作时存在障碍,而他们能够对代表相同活动的照片进行排序。动作产生任务的失败不是由于物体的视觉失认,因为患者可以从视觉上识别它们。也不是由于对其功能的知识丧失(De Renzi & Lucchelli,1988),因为 DR 和 FG 可以从对其使用的描述中识别物体。WH2 的表现模式与失用症患者的表现模式完全不同,即在多项物体测试中保留了动作产生能力,但在照片排序方面存在缺陷。WH2 在照片排序方面的困难不是由于不理解任务造成的,因为她可以对除动作以外的刺激进行排序(例如,形状和数字)。差异也不是由于对动作的知识丧失造成的,因为她可以从照片中执行和识别动作。这些结果表明,DR 和 FG 所观察到的失用症不是由动作序列表示的退化引起的(Lehmkuhl & Poeck,1981;Poeck & Lehmkuhl,1980)。我们在竞争调度模型(Cooper & Shallice,2000;Norman & Shallice,1986)的框架内解释了我们的结果。