We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This study explored mental rotation (MR) performance in patients with myotonic dystrophy 1 (DM1), an inherited neuromuscular disorder dominated by muscular symptoms, including muscle weakness and myotonia. The aim of the study was twofold: to gain new insights into the neurocognitive mechanisms of MR and to better clarify the cognitive profile of DM1 patients. To address these aims, we used MR tasks involving kinds of stimuli that varied for the extent to which they emphasized motor simulation and activation of body representations (body parts) versus visuospatial imagery (abstract objects). We hypothesized that, if peripheral sensorimotor feedback system plays a pivotal role in modulating MR performance, then DM1 patients would exhibit more difficulties in mentally rotating hand stimuli than abstract objects.
Method:
Twenty-four DM1 patients and twenty-four age- and education-matched control subjects were enrolled in the study and were required to perform two computerized MR tasks involving pictures of hands and abstract objects.
Results:
The analysis of accuracy showed that patients had impaired MR performance when the angular disparities between the stimuli were higher. Notably, as compared to controls, patients showed slower responses when the stimuli were hands, whereas no significant differences when stimuli were objects.
Conclusion:
The findings are coherent with the embodied cognition view, indicating a tight relation between body- and motor-related processes and MR. They suggest that peripheral, muscular, abnormalities in DM1 lead to alterations in manipulation of motor representations, which in turn affect MR, especially when body parts are to mentally rotate.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.