4.5 Article

Effect of meaning on apraxic finger imitation deficits

期刊

NEUROPSYCHOLOGIA
卷 82, 期 -, 页码 74-83

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.12.022

关键词

Apraxia; Meaning; Cognitive models of imitation

资金

  1. Marga and Walter Boll Foundation
  2. German Research Council (DFG) [FI 1915/2-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Apraxia typically results from left-hemispheric (LH), but also from right-hemispheric (RH) stroke, and often impairs gesture imitation. Especially in LH stroke, it is important to differentiate apraxia-induced gesture imitation deficits from those due to co-morbid aphasia and associated semantic deficits, possibly influencing the imitation of meaningful (MF) gestures. To explore this issue, we first investigated if the 10 supposedly meaningless (ML) gestures of a widely used finger imitation test really carry no meaning, or if the test also contains MF gestures, by asking healthy subjects (n=45) to classify these gestures as MF or ML. Most healthy subjects (98%) classified three of the 10 gestures as clearly MF. Only two gestures were considered predominantly ML. We next assessed how imitation in stroke patients (255 LH, 113 RH stroke) is influenced by gesture meaning and how aphasia influences imitation of LH stroke patients (n=208). All patients and especially patients with imitation deficits (17% of LH, 27% of RH stroke patients) imitated MF gestures significantly better than ML gestures. Importantly, meaningfulness-scores of all 10 gestures significantly predicted imitation scores of patients with imitation deficits. Furthermore, especially in LH stroke patients with imitation deficits, the severity of aphasia significantly influenced the imitation of MF, but not ML gestures. Our findings in a large patient cohort support current cognitive models of imitation and strongly suggest that ML gestures are particularly sensitive to detect imitation deficits while minimising confounding effects of aphasia which affect the imitation of MF gestures in LH stroke patients. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据