What is in a tool concept? Dissociating manipulation knowledge from function knowledge

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 40, Issue 8, 2012, Pages 1303-1313

  Garcea, Frank E ^a   Mahon, Bradford Z ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Abstract knowledge; Concepts; Embodied cognition; Semantic memory

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; COGNITION; CONCEPT FORMATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; KNOWLEDGE; MALE; MEMORY; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; SEMANTICS; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; COGNITION; CONCEPT FORMATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; KNOWLEDGE; MALE; MEMORY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; SEMANTICS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84870563921     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: 15325946     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13421-012-0236-y     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577-660.
2. Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review in Psycholology, 59, 617-645.
3. Beauvois, M. F. (1982). Optic aphasia: A process of interaction between vision and language. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 298, 35-47.
4. Binder, J. R., & Desai, R. H. (2011). The neurobiology of semantic memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 527-536.
5. Boronat, C. B., Buxbaum, L. J., Coslett, H. B., Tang, K., Saffran, E. M., Kimberg, D. Y., & Detre, J. A. (2005). Distinctions between manipulation and function knowledge of objects: Evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging. Cognitive Brain Research, 23, 361-373.
6. Bruyer, R., & Brysbaert, M. (2011). Combining speed and accuracy in cognitive psychology: Is the Inverse Efficiency (IES) a better dependent variable than the mean reaction time (RT) and the percentage of errors (PE)? Psychologica Belgica, 51, 5-13.
7. Buxbaum, L. J., & Saffran, E. M. (2002). Knowledge of object manipulation and object function: Dissociations in apraxic and nonapraxic subjects. Brain and Language, 82, 179-199.
8. Buxbaum, L. J., Veramonti, T., & Schwartz, M. F. (2000). Function and manipulation tool knowledge in apraxia: Knowing "what for" but not "how". Neurocase, 6, 83-97.
9. Canessa, N., Borgo, F., Cappa, S. F., Perani, D., Falini, A., Buccino, G., Tettamanti, M., & Shallice, T. (2008). The different neural correlates of action and functional knowledge in semantic memory: An fMRI study. Cerebral Cortex, 18, 740-751.
10. Capitani, E., Laiacona, M., Mahon, B., & Caramazza, A. (2003). What are the facts of category-specific disorders? A critical review of the clinical evidence. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20, 213-261.
11. Caramazza, A., Hillis, A., Rapp, B. C., & Romani, C. (1990). The multiple semantics hypothesis: Multiple confusions? Cognitive Neuropsychology, 7, 161-189.
12. Chatterjee, A. (2010). Disembodying cognition. Language and Cognition, 2, 79-116.
13. Coslett, H. B., & Saffran, E. M. (1989). Preserved object recognition and reading comprehension in optic aphasia. Brain, 112, 1091-1110.
14. Costa, A., Caramazza, A., & Sebastian-Galles, N. (2000). The cognate facilitation effect: Implications for models of lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1283-1296.
15. Crutch, S., & Warrington, E. K. (2005). Abstract and concrete concepts have structurally different representational frameworks. Brain, 128, 615-627.
16. Cubelli, R., Marchetti, C., Boscolo, G., & Della Salla, S. (2000). Cognition in action: Testing a model of limb apraxia. Brain and Cognition, 44, 144-165.
17. Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35, 116-124.
18. Gallese, V., & Lakoff, G. (2005). The brain's concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22, 455-479.
19. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
20. Hickok, G. (2009). Eight problems for the mirror neuron theory of action understanding in monkeys and humans. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21, 1229-1243.
21. Ishibashi, R., Lambon Ralph, M. A., Saito, S., & Pobric, G. (2011). Different roles of lateral anterior temporal and inferior parietal lobule in coding function and manipulation tool knowledge: Evidence from an rTMS study. Neuropsychologia, 49, 1128-1135.
22. Kellenbach, M. L., Brett, M., & Patterson, K. (2003). Actions speak louder than functions: The importance of manipulability and action in tool representation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 20-46.
23. Kemmerer, D., & Gonzalez Castillo, J. (2010). The two-level theory of verb meaning: An approach to integrating the semantics of action with the mirror neuron system. Brain and Language, 112, 54-76.
24. Kiefer, M., & Pulvermüller, F. (2012). Conceptual representations in mind and brain: Theoretical developments, current evidence and future directions. Cortex, 48, 805-825.
25. Landau, B., Smith, L., & Jones, S. (1998). Object shape, object function, and object name. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 1-27.
26. Leiguarda, R. C., & Marsden, C. D. (2000). Limb apraxias: Higher-order disorders of sensorimotor integration. Brain, 123, 860-879.
27. Liepmann, H. (1977). The syndrome of apraxia (motor asymboly) based on a case of unilateral apraxia. (A translation from Monatschrift für Psychiatrie und Neurologie, 1900, 8, 15-44). In D. A. Rottenberg & F. H. Hockberg (Eds.), Neurological classics in modern translation. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.
28. Lotto, L., Job, R., & Rumiati, R. (1999). Visual effect in picture and word categorization. Memory and Cognition, 27, 674-684.
29. Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2005). The orchestration of the sensory-motor systems: Clues from neuropsychology. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22, 480-494.
30. Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2008). A critical look at the embodied cognition hypothesis and a new proposal for grounding conceptual content. Journal of Physiology - Paris, 102, 59-70.
31. Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2009). Concepts and categories: A cognitive neuropsychological perspective. Annual Reviews in Psychology, 60, 27-51.
32. Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2011). What drives the organization of object knowledge in the brain? Trends In Cognitive Science, 15, 97-103.
33. Navarrete, E., Del Prato, P., & Mahon, B. Z. (2012). Factors determining semantic faciliation and interference in the cyclic naming paradigm. Frontiers in Psychology, 38, 1-15.
34. Negri, G. A., Lunardelli, A., Reverberi, C., Gigli, G. L., & Rumiati, R. I. (2007). Degraded semantic knowledge and accurate object use. Cerebral Cortex, 43, 376-388.
35. Negri, G. A. L., Rumiati, R. I., Zadini, A., Ukmar, M., Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2007). What is the role of motor simulation in action and object recognition? Evidence from apraxia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 24, 795-816.
36. Ochipa, C., Rothi, L. J. G., & Heilman, K. M. (1989). Ideational apraxia: A deficit in tool selection and use. Annals of Neurology, 25, 190-193.
37. Pelgrims, B., Olivier, E., & Andres, M. (2011). Dissociation between manipulation and conceptual knowledge of object use in supramarginalis gyrus. Human Brain Mapping, 32, 1802-1810.
38. Peterson, R. P., & Savoy, P. (1998). Lexical selection and phonological encoding during language production: Evidence for cascading processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 539-557.
39. Pobric, G., Jeffries, E., & Lambon Ralph, A. (2010). Amodal semantic representations depend on both anterior temporal lobes: Evidence from repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. Neuropsychologia, 48, 1336-1342.
40. Pulvermüller, F. (2005). Brain mechanisms linking language and action. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6, 576-582.
41. Rosci, C., Chiesa, V., Laiacona, M., & Capitani, E. (2003). Apraxia is not associated to a disproportionate naming impairment for manipulable objects. Brain and Cognition, 53, 412-415.
42. Rothi, L. J. G., Ochipa, C., & Heilman, K. M. (1991). A cognitive neuropsychological model of limb praxis. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 8, 443-458.
43. Rueschemeyer, S.-A., van Rooij, D., Lindemann, O., Willems, R. M., & Bekkering, H. (2010). The function of words: Distinct neural correlates for words denoting differently manipulable objects. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22, 1844-1851.
44. Scorolli, C., & Borghi, A. M. (2007). Sentence comprehension and action: Effector specific modulation of the motor system. Brain Research, 1130, 119-124.
45. Shallice, T. (1988). From neuropsychology to mental structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46. Simmons, W. K., & Barsalou, L. W. (2003). The similarity-in-topography principle: Reconciling theories of conceptual deficits. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20, 451-486.
47. Sirigu, A., Duhamel, J. R., & Poncet, M. (1991). The role of sensorimotor experience in object recognition. Brain, 114, 2555-2573.
48. Teixeira Ferreira, C., Giusiano, B., Ceccaldi, M., & Poncet, M. (1997). Optic aphasia: Evidence of the contribution of different neural systems to object and action naming. Cortex, 33, 499-513.
49. Townsend, J. T., & Ashby, F. G. (1978). Methods of modeling capacity in simple processing systems. In J. Castellan & F. Restle (Eds.), Cognitive theory, 3, 200-239. Hillsdale, N. J.: Erlbaum.
50. Warrington, E. K., & McCarthy, R. A. (1987). Categories of knowledge: Further fractionations and an attempted integration. Brain, 110, 1273-1296.
51. Warrington, E. K., & Shallice, T. (1984). Category specific semantic impairments. Brain, 107, 829-854.
52. Zwaan, R. A., Stanfield, R. A., & Yaxley, R. H. (2002). Language comprehenders mentally represent the shapes of objects. Psychological Science, 13, 168-171.