The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
MULTIPLE REPRESENTATIONS CONTRIBUTE TO BODY KNOWLEDGE PROCESSING: EVIDENCE FROM A CASE OF AUTOTOPAGNOSIA
Open accessAbstract
Body schema disturbances were studied in a 62-yr-old woman with Alzheimer's disease. She was severely impaired in verbal and nonverbal tasks requiring her to localize body parts (on her own body, the examiner's body or a doll's body) even though she correctly named the same parts when pointed at by the examiner. Pointing responses were misdirected mainly to parts contiguous with the target area and, to a lesser extent, to functionally equivalent body parts. We also found that the patient was able to define body part names functionally but not spatially. In another series of tasks, and in contrast to the above results, performances were normal when small objects, attached to the patient's body, served as pointing targets. Furthermore, on subsequent testing she pointed correctly at the remembered position of these objects. The fact that the same point in 'body space' is localized correctly when it corresponds to an external object and erroneously when it corresponds to a body part contradicts the idea of the body schema as a unitary function. Learning the position of objects on the body surface requires access to some form of body-reference system on which this information can be mapped. We argue that such a system can be available in autotopagnosia and is independent from the visuospatial representations of the body structure that are postulated to be damaged or inaccessible in this syndrome. An integrated account of the present results and of those reported by other authors suggests that multiple levels of representation (e.g., sensorimotor, visuospatial, semantic) are involved in the organization of body knowledge.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
OGDEN, J. A. (1985) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/108.4.1009 · Cited by 124
Cited by
My body in the brain: A neurocognitive model of body-ownership.
Tsakiris, M. (2010) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.09.034 · Cited by 1,069
Imagined transformations of bodies: an fMRI investigation
Zacks, J., Rypma, B., Gabrieli, J. D. E., Tversky, B., & Glover, G. H. (1999) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/s0028-3932(99)00012-3 · Cited by 278
Peripersonal Space and Body Schema: Two Labels for the Same Concept?
Cardinali, L., Brozzoli, C., & Farnè, A. (2009) · Brain Topography · doi:10.1007/s10548-009-0092-7 · Cited by 262
Tool-use reshapes the boundaries of body and peripersonal space representations
Canzoneri, E., Ubaldi, S., Rastelli, V., Finisguerra, A., Bassolino, M., & Serino, A. (2013) · Experimental Brain Research · doi:10.1007/s00221-013-3532-2 · Cited by 257
A Kinect-based system for cognitive rehabilitation exercises monitoring
González-Ortega, D., Díaz-Pernas, F. J., Martínez-Zarzuela, M., & Antón-Rodríguez, M. (2014) · Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine · doi:10.1016/j.cmpb.2013.10.014 · Cited by 167
Metadata
- Authors
- SIRIGU, A., GRAFMAN, J., BRESSLER, K., & SUNDERLAND, T.
- Venue
- Brain
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1991
- Volume
- 114
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 629-642
- ISSN
- 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2156
- OpenAlex
- W2133714345
- Cited by
- 301
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 0.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: MULTIPLE REPRESENTATIONS CONTRIBUTE TO BODY KNOWLEDGE PROCESSING: EVIDENCE FROM A CASE OF AUTOTOPAGNOSIA. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/brain/114.1.629
- The paper
- SIRIGU, A., GRAFMAN, J., BRESSLER, K., & SUNDERLAND, T. (1991). MULTIPLE REPRESENTATIONS CONTRIBUTE TO BODY KNOWLEDGE PROCESSING: EVIDENCE FROM A CASE OF AUTOTOPAGNOSIA. Brain. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/114.1.629
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.