Tool acceptance and acceptability: insights from a real tool use activity

Cognitive Processing - The issue of tool adoption has been the subject of many investigations, which focus either on acceptability (evaluating intention to use, a priori) or acceptance (evaluating...     

Within reach but not so reachable: Obstacles matter in visual perception of distances

A large number of studies have shown that effort influences the visual perception of reaching distance. These studies have mainly focused on the effects of reach-relevant properties of the body and of the objects that people intend to reach. However, any influence of the reach-relevant properties of the surrounding environment remains still speculative. We investigated this topic in terms of the role of obstacle width in perceiving distances. Participants had to estimate the straight-line distance to a cylinder located just behind a transparent barrier of varying width. The results showed that participants perceived the straight-line distance to the cylinder as being longer when they intended to grasp the cylinder by reaching around a wide transparent barrier rather than by reaching around narrower ones. Interestingly, this effect might be due to the anticipated effort involved in reaching. Together, our results show that reach-relevant properties of the surrounding environment influence perceived distances, thereby supporting an embodied view of the visual perception of space.     

Tool use in left brain damage and Alzheimer's disease: What about function and manipulation knowledge?

Tool use disorders are usually associated with difficulties in retrieving function and manipulation knowledge. Here, we investigate tool use (Real Tool Use, RTU), function (Functional Association, FA) and manipulation knowledge (Gesture Recognition, GR) in 17 left‐brain‐damaged (LBD) patients and 14 AD patients (Alzheimer disease). LBD group exhibited predicted deficit on RTU but not on FA and GR while AD patients showed deficits on GR and FA with preserved tool use skills. These findings question the role played by function and manipulation knowledge in actual tool use.     

Age differences in maximization

Studies have shown the existence of inter-individual differences in choice behavior, some people seeking for the best (maximizers) and others for a good enough option (satisficers). Here, we explored whether these inter-individual differences are influenced by aging and common personality traits (i.e., Big Five model). Young (n = 125; 19 years old) and elderly adults (n = 101; 86 years old) completed different scales assessing – among others – maximization and Big Five traits. Our results indicated a greater proportion of maximizers in elderly than in young adults. We also found a minor association between maximization and Big Five traits in both groups. In sum, aging influences choice behavior, but this cannot be explained by changes of common personality traits.     

L’appropriation de l’espace chez les personnes âgées dépendantes résidants en EHPAD

IntroductionThe present study focuses on space acquisition process in dependant elderly people living in institution.ObjectiveOur aim was to assess the role of the type of space and level of control on the quality of life in dependant elderly people living in institution.MethodThree variables were examined. The type of space (private versus collective, evaluated with two scales), the level of control (Levenson's IPC and EHIPA) and the quality of life (SF-36 and Geriatric Depression Scale). Our sample consisted of 30 elderly people living in institution.ResultsOur results showed that: (1) subjects appropriate more the private space than the collective space; (2) the level of control influences the acquisition process of collective space but not private space; and (3) the more subjects appropriate the collective space, the better is their quality of life.ConclusionThe results propose that potential applications should be developed in institution.     

L’expérience fraternelle confrontée à la déficience intellectuelle

IntroductionThe present study aims to evaluate the influence of intellectual deficiency on the lifestyle of brothers and sisters.ObjectiveThe objective is to determine whether or not a child's intellectual deficiency has an influence on the nature of the fraternal relationship. We studied the functionality of the familial typology, the feeling of social integration, and the degree of depression in brothers and sisters of children with intellectual disability.MethodThis research was carried out with 34 brothers and sisters of children faced with intellectual disabilities, aged between 6 and 12 years old, and the results were compared with those collected from a test group of 24 children.ResultsThe comparative study shows little differences between siblings and families confronted to intellectual disability and those who are not. The nature of the fraternal relationships differ however as the modality of proximity and conflicts are less expressed by siblings of children faced with intellectual disabilities. Furthermore the correlational study stresses the importance of siblings’ rivalry, the feeling of social integration, and the degree of depression.ConclusionWith these results now uncover risk and protection factors to children confronted to intellectual disabilities among their siblings     

What is the future for tool-specific generalized motor programs?

A key issue in cognitive sciences is to understand the cognitive bases of human tool use. Answers have been provided by two competing approaches. The manipulation-based approach assumes that humans can use tools because of the ability to store sensorimotor knowledge about how to manipulate tools. By contrast, for the reasoning-based approach, human tool use is based on the ability to reason about physical object properties. Recently, Caruana and Cuccio proposed a kind of reconciliation, based on the distinction between three types of abductive inference, involving a different contribution of motor and cognitive elements: Automatic abduction (motor + and cognitive-), abduction by selection (motor ± and cognitive±) and creative abduction (motor- and cognitive+). This perspective offers new interesting avenues. Nevertheless, it is also subject to several theoretical and epistemological limitations, which make it in its present form inappropriate for the study of the cognitive bases of human tool use. This article aims to discuss these limitations.     

Mechanical knowledge does matter to tool use even when assessed with a non-production task: Evidence from left brain-damaged patients

In the literature on apraxia of tool use, it is now accepted that using familiar tools requires semantic and mechanical knowledge. However, mechanical knowledge is nearly always assessed with production tasks, so one may assume that mechanical knowledge and familiar tool use are associated only because of their common motor mechanisms. This notion may be challenged by demonstrating that familiar tool use depends on an alternative tool selection task assessing mechanical knowledge, where alternative uses of tools are assumed according to their physical properties but where actual use of tools is not needed. We tested 21 left brain-damaged patients and 21 matched controls with familiar tool use tasks (pantomime and single tool use), semantic tasks and an alternative tool selection task. The alternative tool selection task accounted for a large amount of variance in the single tool use task and was the best predictor among all the semantic tasks. Concerning the pantomime of tool use task, group and individual results suggested that the integrity of the semantic system and preserved mechanical knowledge are neither necessary nor sufficient to produce pantomimes. These results corroborate the idea that mechanical knowledge is essential when we use tools, even when tasks assessing mechanical knowledge do not require the production of any motor action. Our results also confirm the value of pantomime of tool use, which can be considered as a complex activity involving several cognitive abilities (e.g., communicative skills) rather than the activation of gesture engrams.     

Pliers,not fingers: Tool-action effect in a motor intention paradigm

Tool-use representations have been suggested to be supported by the representation of hand actions and/or by the representation of tool actions. A major issue is to know which one of these two representations is preferentially activated when people intend to use a tool. To address this issue, we developed a paradigm in which, in 20% of trials, participants had to press a button and actually use pliers to move an object in response to a predefined target symbol. Importantly, two masks hiding the symbols performed “opening” or “closing” actions before symbols appeared. In Experiment 1, participants used normal pliers: Hand’s opening actions induced pliers’ opening actions and vice versa for hands’ closing actions. Results indicated a compatibility effect between masks’ actions and pliers’ actions. Participants were faster to press the button in response to the target symbol when opening and closing actions of the masks were congruent with the corresponding actions of the hand. In Experiment 2 participants used inverse pliers: Hand’s opening actions involved pliers’ closing actions and vice versa. In this situation, results showed that the congruency of masks’ actions occurred with pliers’ actions and not hand’s actions. Altogether, these findings demonstrate that intention of use is preferentially based on the representation of tool actions, and have important implications for the domain of neuropsychology of tool use and the theories of goal-directed behavior.     

What Neuropsychology Tells us About Human Tool Use? The Four Constraints Theory (4CT): Mechanics,Space, Time,and Effort

Our understanding of human tool use comes mainly from neuropsychology, particularly from patients with apraxia or action disorganization syndrome. However, there is no integrative, theoretical framework explaining what these neuropsychological syndromes tell us about the cognitive/neural bases of human tool use. The goal of the present article is to fill this gap, by providing a theoretical framework for the study of human tool use: The Four Constraints Theory (4CT). This theory rests on two basic assumptions. First, everyday tool use activities can be formalized as multiple problem situations consisted of four distinct constraints (mechanics, space, time, and effort). Second, each of these constraints can be solved by the means of a specific process (technical reasoning, semantic reasoning, working memory, and simulation-based decision-making, respectively). Besides presenting neuropsychological evidence for 4CT, this article shall address epistemological, theoretical and methodological issues I will attempt to resolve. This article will discuss how 4CT diverges from current cognitive models about several widespread hypotheses (e.g., notion of routine, direct and automatic activation of tool knowledge, simulation-based tool knowledge).