The Representation of Objects in Apraxia: From Action Execution to Error Awareness

Abstract

Apraxia is a well-known syndrome characterized by the sufferer’s inability to perform routine gestures. In an attempt to understand the syndrome better, various different theories have been developed and a number of classifications of different subtypes have been proposed. In this article review, we will address these theories with a specific focus on how the use of objects helps us to better understand upper limb apraxia. With this aim, we will consider transitive vs. intransitive action dissociation as well as less frequent types of apraxia involving objects, i.e., constructive apraxia and magnetic apraxia. Pantomime and the imitation of objects in use are also considered with a view to dissociating the various different components involved in upper limb apraxia. Finally, we discuss the evidence relating to action recognition and awareness of errors in the execution of actions. Various different components concerning the use of objects emerge from our analysis and the results show that knowledge of an object and sensory-motor representations are supported by other functions such as spatial and body representations, executive functions and monitoring systems.

Predicting Object-Mediated Gestures From Brain Activity: An EEG Study on Gender Differences

“…This object-based movement description is based on neuroscientific literature. Indeed, upper limb movements can be grouped in three broad categories according to neuro-psychological and behavioural criteria [8], [50], [51]. More in detail, these three types of movements are: (i) intransitive actions, i.e., not involving the use of any object, yet meaningful and/or communicative; (ii) transitive actions, i.e., characterised by the interaction with a single object; and (iii) tool mediated actions, i.e., indicating tasks where an object is used as a tool to interact with another one [1].…”

“…More in detail, these three types of movements are: (i) intransitive actions, i.e., not involving the use of any object, yet meaningful and/or communicative; (ii) transitive actions, i.e., characterised by the interaction with a single object; and (iii) tool mediated actions, i.e., indicating tasks where an object is used as a tool to interact with another one [1]. These classes of action have already been extensively described in terms of psychological and behavioural response in several medical studies focused on apraxia [8], [50], [51], i.e., the inability to perform purposive actions as a result of a brain damage. Moreover, the topographical representation of the associated neural activity has been already studied using fMRI [52].…”

A kinematic examination of dual-route processing for action imitation

“…Apraxia, a disorder of complex movement, is one example where this can be the case. Patients with apraxia can show deficits in, among other skills, the ability to imitate meaningful or meaningless actions (Buxbaum & Kalénine, 2010;Buxbaum & Randerath, 2018;Canzano et al, 2016;Petreska et al, 2007;Rumiati et al, 2009).…”

EEG Processing to Discriminate Transitive-Intransitive Motor Imagery Tasks: Preliminary Evidences using Support Vector Machines

“…In the task space, it is possible to identify three main classes of actions associated with different neuropsychological correlates [8], [25], [26]: intransitive (i.e., meaningful gestures that do not include the use of objects), transitive (i.e., actions involving an object), and toolmediated (i.e., actions in which an object is used to act upon another) [2]. A functional imaging study [27] has already demonstrated that these three classes of actions generate distinct neural patterns in the human brain during motor visualisation, and exhibit a specific topographical organisation of the brain response.…”