Is the category-specific deficit for living things spurious?
Is the category-specific deficit for living things spurious?
复制标题
生物的特定类别赤字是虚假的吗？
DOI：
10.1162/089892998562780
复制
发表时间：
1998
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
Farah,MJ
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kurbat,MA;Farah,MJ
一些神经系统患者在命名生物时比非生物时犯更多错误。即使考虑到命名生物和非生物的困难，也是如此，这是通过正常受试者的表现来衡量的。Gaffan和Heywood（1993）认为，这种明显的生物选择性缺陷是虚假的，并从噪声对回归分析的影响方面对此提出了另一种解释。我们报告的Monte Carlo模拟表明，在两个病人，生物赤字不能占这以这种方式。这些模拟更符合生物识别依赖于专门机制的主张。
Some neurological patients make more errors naming living than nonliving things. This is true even when the difficulty of naming living and nonliving things, as measured by the performance of normal subjects, is taken into account. Gaffan and Heywood (1993) argued that this apparently selective deficit for living things is spurious and offered an alternative explanation of it in terms of the effect of noise on regression analyses. We report Monte Carlo simulations showing that, in two patients, the living things deficit cannot be accounted for this in this way. These simulations are more consistent with the claim that the recognition of living things depends on specialized mechanisms.