Left anterior supramarginal gyrus activity during tool use action observation after extensive tool use training.

The advanced use of complex tools is considered a primary characteristic of human evolution and technological advancement. However, questions remain regarding whether humans possess unique underlying brain networks that support advanced tool-using abilities. Specifically, previous studies have demonstrated the presence of a structurally and functionally unique region in the left anterior supramarginal gyrus (aSMG), that is consistently active during tool use action observation. This region has been proposed as a primary hub for integrating semantic and technical information to form action plans with tools. However, it is still largely unknown how tool use motor learning affects left aSMG activation or connectivity with other brain regions. To address this, participants with little experience using chopsticks observed an experimenter using chopsticks to perform a novel task while undergoing two functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scans. Between the scans, participants underwent four weeks of behavioral training where they learned to use chopsticks and achieve proficiency in the observed task. Results demonstrated a significant change in effective connectivity between the left aSMG and the left anterior intraparietal sulcus (aIPS), a region involved in object affordances and planning grasping actions. These findings suggest that during unfamiliar tool use, the left aSMG integrates semantic and technical information to communicate with regions involved with grasp selection, such as the aIPS. This communication then allows appropriate grasps to be planned based on the physical properties of the objects involved and their potential interactions.

Grip selection without tool knowledge: end-state comfort effect in familiar and novel tool use.

A well-known phenomenon for the study of movement planning is the end-state comfort (ESC) effect: When they reach and grasp tools, individuals tend to adopt uncomfortable initial hand postures if that allows a subsequent comfortable final posture. In the context of tool use, this effect is modulated by tool orientation, task goal, and cooperation. However, the cognitive bases of the ESC effect remain unclear. The goal of this study was to determine the contribution of semantic tool knowledge and technical reasoning to movement planning, by testing whether the ESC effect typically observed with familiar tools would also be observed with novel tools. Twenty-six participants were asked to reach and grasp familiar and novel tools under varying conditions (i.e., tool's handle downward vs. upward; tool transport vs. use; solo vs. cooperation). In our findings, the effects of tool orientation, task goal and cooperation were replicated with novel tools. It follows that semantic tool knowledge is not critical for the ESC effect to occur. In fact, we found an "habitual" effect: Participant adopted uncomfortable grips with familiar tools even when it was not necessary (i.e., to transport them), probably because of the interference of habitual movement programming with actual movement programming. A cognitive view of movement planning is proposed, according to which goal comprehension (1) may rely on semantic tool knowledge, technical reasoning, and/or social skills, (2) defines end-state configuration, which in turn (3) calibrates beginning-state comfort and hence the occurrence of the ESC effect.

Physical understanding in neurodegenerative diseases.

This quantitative review gives an overview of physical understanding (i.e., the ability to represent and use the laws of physics to interact with the physical world) impairments in Alzheimer's disease (AD), semantic dementia (SD), and corticobasal syndrome (CBS), as assessed mainly with mechanical problem-solving and tool use tests. This review shows that: (1) SD patients have apraxia of tool use because of semantic tool knowledge deficits, but normal performance in tests of physical understanding; (2) AD and CBS patients show impaired performance in mechanical problem-solving tests, probably not because of intrinsic deficits of physical understanding, but rather because of additional cognitive (AD) or motor impairments (CBS); (3) As a result, the performance in mechanical problem-solving tests is not a good predictor of familiar tool use in dementia; (4) Actual deficits of physical understanding are probably observed only in late stages of neurodegenerative diseases, and associated with functional loss.

Learning versus reasoning to use tools in children.

Tool behavior might be based on two strategies associated with specific cognitive mechanisms: cued-learning and technical-reasoning strategies. We aimed to explore whether these strategies coexist in young children and whether they are manifest differently through development. We presented 216 3- to 9-year-olds with a vertical maze task consisting in moving a ball from the top to the bottom of a maze. Two tool-use/mechanical actions were possible: rotating action and sliding action. Three conditions were tested, each focused on a different strategy. In the Opaque-Cue condition (cued-learning strategy), children could not see the mechanical action of each tool. Nevertheless, a cue was provided according to the tool needed to solve the problem. In the Transparent-No Cue condition (technical-reasoning strategy), no cue was presented. However, children could see the mechanical actions associated with each tool. In the Transparent-Cue condition (cued-learning and/or technical-reasoning strategies) children saw both the mechanical actions and the cues. Results indicated that the Opaque-Cue and Transparent-Cue conditions were easier than the Transparent-No-Cue condition in all children. These findings stress that children can use either cued learning or technical reasoning to use tools, according to the available information. The behavioral pattern observed in the Transparent-Cue condition suggests that children might be inclined to use technical reasoning even when the task can be solved through cued learning.

The elephant in the room: What matters cognitively in cumulative technological culture.

Cumulative technological culture (CTC) refers to the increase in the efficiency and complexity of tools and techniques in human populations over generations. A fascinating question is to understand the cognitive origins of this phenomenon. Because CTC is definitely a social phenomenon, most accounts have suggested a series of cognitive mechanisms oriented toward the social dimension (e.g., teaching, imitation, theory of mind, and metacognition), thereby minimizing the technical dimension and the potential influence of non-social, cognitive skills. What if we have failed to see the elephant in the room? What if social cognitive mechanisms were only catalyzing factors and not the sufficient and necessary conditions for the emergence of CTC? In this article, we offer an alternative, unified cognitive approach to this phenomenon by assuming that CTC originates in non-social cognitive skills, namely technical-reasoning skills which enable humans to develop the technical potential necessary to constantly acquire and improve technical information. This leads us to discuss how theory of mind and metacognition, in concert with technical reasoning, can help boost CTC. The cognitive approach developed here opens up promising new avenues for reinterpreting classical issues (e.g., innovation, emulation vs. imitation, social vs. asocial learning, cooperation, teaching, and overimitation) in a field that has so far been largely dominated by other disciplines, such as evolutionary biology, mathematics, anthropology, archeology, economics, and philosophy.

Novel Tool Selection in Left Brain-Damaged Patients With Apraxia of Tool Use: A Study of Three Cases.

OBJECTIVES: Recent evidence indicates that some left brain-damaged (LBD) patients have difficulties to use familiar tools because of the inability to reason about physical object properties. A fundamental issue is to understand the residual capacity of those LBD patients in tool selection. METHODS: Three LBD patients with tool use disorders, three right brain-damaged (RBD) patients, and six matched healthy controls performed a novel tool selection task, consisting in extracting a target out from a box by selecting the relevant tool among eight, four, or two tools. Three criteria were manipulated to make relevant and irrelevant tools (size, rigidity, shape). RESULTS: LBD patients selected a greater number of irrelevant tools and had more difficulties to solve the task compared to RBD patients and controls. All participants committed more errors for selecting relevant tools based on rigidity and shape than size. In some LBD patients, the difficulties persisted even in the 2-Choice condition. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings confirm that tool use disorders result from impaired technical reasoning, leading patients to meet difficulties in selecting tools based on their physical properties. We also go further by showing that these difficulties can decrease as the choice is reduced, at least for some properties, opening new avenues for rehabilitation programs. (JINS, 2018, 24, 524-529).

Involvement of the Left Supramarginal Gyrus in Manipulation Judgment Tasks: Contributions to Theories of Tool Use.

OBJECTIVES: Two theories of tool use, namely the gesture engram and the technical reasoning theories, make distinct predictions about the involvement of the left inferior parietal lobe (IPL) in manipulation judgement tasks. The objective here is to test these alternative predictions based on previous studies on manipulation judgment tasks using transcranial magnetic stimulations (TMS) targeting the left supramarginal gyrus (SMG). METHODS: We review recent TMS studies on manipulation judgement tasks and confront these data with predictions made by both tool use theories. RESULTS: The left SMG is a highly intertwined region, organized following several functionally distinct areas and TMS may have disrupted a cortical network involved in the ability to use tools rather than only one functional area supporting manipulation knowledge. Moreover, manipulation judgement tasks may be impaired following virtual lesions outside the IPL. CONCLUSIONS: These data are more in line with the technical reasoning hypothesis, which assumes that the left IPL does not store manipulation knowledge per se. (JINS, 2017, 23, 685-691).

Bringing cumulative technological culture beyond copying versus reasoning.

The dominant view of cumulative technological culture suggests that high-fidelity transmission rests upon a high-fidelity copying ability, which allows individuals to reproduce the tool-use actions performed by others without needing to understand them (i.e., without causal reasoning). The opposition between copying versus reasoning is well accepted but with little supporting evidence. In this article, we investigate this distinction by examining the cognitive science literature on tool use. Evidence indicates that the ability to reproduce others' tool-use actions requires causal understanding, which questions the copying versus reasoning distinction and the cognitive reality of the so-called copying ability. We conclude that new insights might be gained by considering causal understanding as a key driver of cumulative technological culture.

Is Shadowing Behavior Caused by Body Representation Disorders and Apraxia?

Shadowing is a person-following behavior, commonly observed in dementia (e.g., Alzheimer's disease). It may be caused by neuropsychological impairments associated with posterior brain lesions, as Kudo et al. described it in a patient with posterior cortical atrophy and no frontal signs. These authors have suggested that shadowing may arise from the combination of visuospatial impairments, aphasia, apraxia, and prosopagnosia. However, how these symptoms may contribute to shadowing remains unclear. It is suggested that the combination of visuospatial impairments, body representation disorders, and apraxia, may result in complete loss of spatial representations and hence, shadowing behavior.

On the psychological origins of tool use.

The ubiquity of tool use in human life has generated multiple lines of scientific and philosophical investigation to understand the development and expression of humans' engagement with tools and its relation to other dimensions of human experience. However, existing literature on tool use faces several epistemological challenges in which the same set of questions generate many different answers. At least four critical questions can be identified, which are intimately intertwined-(1) What constitutes tool use? (2) What psychological processes underlie tool use in humans and nonhuman animals? (3) Which of these psychological processes are exclusive to tool use? (4) Which psychological processes involved in tool use are exclusive to Homo sapiens? To help advance a multidisciplinary scientific understanding of tool use, six author groups representing different academic disciplines (e.g., anthropology, psychology, neuroscience) and different theoretical perspectives respond to each of these questions, and then point to the direction of future work on tool use. We find that while there are marked differences among the responses of the respective author groups to each question, there is a surprising degree of agreement about many essential concepts and questions. We believe that this interdisciplinary and intertheoretical discussion will foster a more comprehensive understanding of tool use than any one of these perspectives (or any one of these author groups) would (or could) on their own.

On the Neurocognitive Co-Evolution of Tool Behavior and Language: Insights from the Massive Redeployment Framework.

Understanding the link between brain evolution and the evolution of distinctive features of modern human cognition is a fundamental challenge. A still unresolved question concerns the co-evolution of tool behavior (i.e., tool use or tool making) and language. The shared neurocognitive processes hypothesis suggests that the emergence of the combinatorial component of language skills within the frontal lobe/Broca's area made possible the complexification of tool-making skills. The importance of the frontal lobe/Broca's area in tool behavior is somewhat surprising with regard to the literature on neuropsychology and cognitive neuroscience, which has instead stressed the critical role of the left inferior parietal lobe. Therefore, to be complete, any version of the shared neurocognitive processes hypothesis needs to integrate the potential interactions between the frontal lobe/Broca's area and the left inferior parietal lobe as well as their co-evolution at a phylogenetic level. Here, we sought to provide the first elements of answer through the use of the massive deployment framework, which posits that evolutionarily older brain areas are deployed in more cognitive functions (i.e., they are less specific). We focused on the left parietal cortex, and particularly the left areas PF, PGI, and anterior intraparietal (AIP), which are known to be involved in tool use, language, and motor control, respectively. The deployment of each brain area in different cognitive functions was measured by conducting a meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies. Our results confirmed the pattern of specificity for each brain area and also showed that the left area PGI was far less specific than the left areas PF and AIP. From these findings, we discuss the different evolutionary scenarios depicting the potential co-evolution of the combinatorial and generative components of language and tool behavior in our lineage.

Pantomime of tool use: looking beyond apraxia.

Pantomime has a long tradition in clinical neuropsychology of apraxia. It has been much more used by researchers and clinicians to assess tool-use disorders than real tool use. Nevertheless, it remains incompletely understood and has given rise to controversies, such as the involvement of the left inferior parietal lobe or the nature of the underlying cognitive processes. The present article offers a comprehensive framework, with the aim of specifying the neural and cognitive bases of pantomime. To do so, we conducted a series of meta-analyses of brain-lesion, neuroimaging and behavioural studies about pantomime and other related tasks (i.e. real tool use, imitation of meaningless postures and semantic knowledge). The first key finding is that the area PF (Area PF complex) within the left inferior parietal lobe is crucially involved in both pantomime and real tool use as well as in the kinematics component of pantomime. The second key finding is the absence of a well-defined neural substrate for the posture component of pantomime (both grip errors and body-part-as-tool responses). The third key finding is the role played by the intraparietal sulcus in both pantomime and imitation of meaningless postures. The fourth key finding is that the left angular gyrus seems to be critical in the production of motor actions directed towards the body. The fifth key finding is that performance on pantomime is strongly correlated with the severity of semantic deficits. Taken together, these findings invite us to offer a neurocognitive model of pantomime, which provides an integrated alternative to the two hypotheses that dominate the field: The gesture-engram hypothesis and the communicative hypothesis. More specifically, this model assumes that technical reasoning (notably the left area PF), the motor-control system (notably the intraparietal sulcus), body structural description (notably the left angular gyrus), semantic knowledge (notably the polar temporal lobes) and potentially theory of mind (notably the middle prefrontal cortex) work in concert to produce pantomime. The original features of this model open new avenues for understanding the neurocognitive bases of pantomime, emphasizing that pantomime is a communicative task that nevertheless originates in specific tool-use (not motor-related) cognitive processes. .

The Pedagogue, the Engineer, and the Friend : From Whom Do We Learn?

Humans can follow different social learning strategies, sometimes oriented toward the models' characteristics (i.e., who-strategies). The goal of the present study was to explore which who-strategy is preferentially followed in the technological context based on the models' psychological characteristics. We identified three potential who-strategies: Copy the pedagogue (a model with high theory-of-mind skills), copy the engineer (a model with high technical-reasoning skills), and copy the friend (a model with high level of prosocialness). We developed a closed-group micro-society paradigm in which participants had to build the highest possible towers. Participants began with an individual building phase. Then, they were gathered to discuss the best solutions to increase tower height. After this discussion phase, they had to make a new building attempt, followed by another discussion phase, and so forth for a total of six building phases and five discussion rounds. This methodology allowed us to create an attraction score for each participant (the more an individual was copied in a group, the greater the attraction score). We also assessed participants' theory-of-mind skills, technical-reasoning skills, and prosocialness to predict participants' attraction scores based on these measures. Results show that we learn from engineers (high technical-reasoning skills) because they are the most successful. Their attraction power is not immediate, but after they have been identified as attractors, their technique is copied irrespective of their pedagogy (theory-of-mind skills) or friendliness (prosocialness). These findings open avenues for the study of the cognitive bases of human technological culture.

Effects of Tool Novelty and Action Demands on Gaze Searching During Tool Observation.

Technical reasoning refers to making inferences about how to use tools. The degree of technical reasoning is indicated by the bias of the gaze (fixation) on the functional part of the tool when in use. Few studies have examined whether technical reasoning differs between familiar and unfamiliar novel tools. In addition, what effect the intention to use the tool has on technical reasoning has not been determined. This study examined gaze shifts in relation to familiar or unfamiliar tools, under three conditions (free viewing, lift, and use), among 14 healthy adults (mean age ± standard deviation, 29.4 ± 3.9 years). The cumulative fixation time on the functional part of the tool served as a quantitative indicator of the degree of technical reasoning. The two-way analysis of variance for tools (familiar and unfamiliar) and conditions (free viewing, lift, and use) revealed that the cumulative fixation time significantly increased under free viewing and use conditions, compared to lift conditions. Relative to the free viewing condition, cumulative fixation time for unfamiliar tools significantly decreased in the lift condition and significantly increased in the use condition. Importantly, the results showed that technical reasoning was performed in both the use and the free viewing conditions. However, technical reasoning in the free viewing condition was not as strong as in the use condition. The difference between technical reasoning in free viewing and use conditions may indicate the difference between automatic and intentional technical reasoning.

Roles of Technical Reasoning, Theory of Mind, Creativity, and Fluid Cognition in Cumulative Technological Culture.

Cumulative technological culture can be defined as the progressive diversification, complexification, and enhancement of technological traits through generations. An outstanding issue is to specify the cognitive bases of this phenomenon. Based on the literature, we identified four potential cognitive factors: namely, theory-of-mind, technical-reasoning, creativity, and fluid-cognitive skills. The goal of the present study was to test which of these factors-or a combination thereof-best predicted the cumulative performance in two experimental, micro-society conditions (Communication and Observation conditions; n = 100 each) differing in the nature of the interaction (verbal, visual) allowed between participants. The task was to build the highest possible tower. Participants were also assessed on the four aforementioned cognitive factors in order to predict cumulative performance (tower height) and attractiveness. Our findings indicate that technical-reasoning skills are the best predictor of cumulative performance (tower height), even if their role may be restricted to the specific technological domain. Theory-of-mind skills may have a facilitator role, particularly in the Communication condition. Creativity can also help in the generation of novel ideas, but it is not sufficient to support innovation. Finally, fluid cognition is not involved in cumulative technological culture. Taken together, these findings suggest that domain-specific knowledge (i.e., technical-reasoning skills) remains critical for explaining cumulative technological culture.

How Our Cognition Shapes and Is Shaped by Technology: A Common Framework for Understanding Human Tool-Use Interactions in the Past, Present, and Future.

Over the evolution, humans have constantly developed and improved their technologies. This evolution began with the use of physical tools, those tools that increase our sensorimotor abilities (e.g., first stone tools, modern knives, hammers, pencils). Although we still use some of these tools, we also employ in daily life more sophisticated tools for which we do not systematically understand the underlying physical principles (e.g., computers, cars). Current research is also turned toward the development of brain-computer interfaces directly linking our brain activity to machines (i.e., symbiotic tools). The ultimate goal of research on this topic is to identify the key cognitive processes involved in these different modes of interaction. As a primary step to fulfill this goal, we offer a first attempt at a common framework, based on the idea that humans shape technologies, which also shape us in return. The framework proposed is organized into three levels, describing how we interact when using physical (Past), sophisticated (Present), and symbiotic (Future) technologies. Here we emphasize the role played by technical reasoning and practical reasoning, two key cognitive processes that could nevertheless be progressively suppressed by the proficient use of sophisticated and symbiotic tools. We hope that this framework will provide a common ground for researchers interested in the cognitive basis of human tool-use interactions, from paleoanthropology to neuroergonomics.

Tool use in neurodegenerative diseases: Planning or technical reasoning?

Recent works showed that tool use can be impaired in stroke patients because of either planning or technical reasoning deficits, but these two hypotheses have not yet been compared in the field of neurodegenerative diseases. The aim of this study was to address the relationships between real tool use, mechanical problem-solving, and planning skills in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD, n = 32), semantic dementia (SD, n = 16), and corticobasal syndrome (CBS, n = 9). Patients were asked to select and use ten common tools, to solve three mechanical problems, and to complete the Tower of London test. Motor function and episodic memory were controlled using the Purdue Pegboard Test and the BEC96 questionnaire, respectively. A data-transformation method was applied to avoid ceiling effects, and single-case analysis was performed based on raw scores and completion time. All groups demonstrated either impaired or slowed tool use. Planning deficits were found only in the AD group. Mechanical problem-solving deficits were observed only in the AD and CBS groups. Performance in the Tower of London test was the best predictor of tool use skills in the AD group, suggesting these patients had general rather than mechanical problem-solving deficits. Episodic memory seemed to play little role in performance. Motor dysfunction tended to be associated with tool use skills in CBS patients, while tool use disorders are interpreted as a consequence of the semantic loss in SD in line with previous works. These findings may encourage caregivers to set up disease-centred interventions.