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

Author:

Baumard JosselinORCID,Lesourd Mathieu,Jarry Christophe,Merck Catherine,Etcharry-Bouyx Frédérique,Chauviré Valérie,Belliard Serge,Osiurak François,Le Gall Didier

Abstract

AbstractObjective: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.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health,Neurology (clinical),Clinical Psychology,General Neuroscience

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3