User talk:AFdeCH

Welcome to the Wikipedia!

Hello, and Welcome to the Wikipedia, AFdeCH! Thanks for the contribution to the Mirror neuron article. Hope you enjoy editing here and becoming a Wikipedian! Here are a few perfunctory tips to hasten your acculturation into the Wikipedia experience:

Take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial and Manual of Style.
When you have time, please peruse The five pillars of Wikipedia, and assume good faith, but keep in mind the unique style you brought to the Wiki!
Always be mindful of striving for NPOV, be respectful of others' POV, and remember your perspective on the meaning of neutrality is invaluable!
If you need any help, post your question at the Help Desk.
Explore, be bold in editing, and, above all else, have fun!

And some odds and ends: Boilerplate text, Brilliant prose, Cite your sources, Civility, Conflict resolution, How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Pages needing attention, Peer review, Policy Library, Utilities, Verifiability, Village pump, and Wikiquette; also, you can sign your name on any page by typing four tildes: ~~~~.

Best of luck, AFdeCH, and most importantly, have fun! Ombudsman 21:13, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mirror neurons and imitation

Thanks for the quick correction on the imitation articlediff. If I understand correctly fMRI can only find evidence of neural correlates for behaviour. What further studies would be needed to establish whether, or not, mirror neurons are active in actual human learning? ----Action potential ^{t c} 09:45, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My comment was just on the Iacoboni paper which involved imitation but not learning. There are other fMRI studies, e.g. Buccino et al, Neuron, 2004, which do look specifically at learning by imitation. AFdeCH 13:38, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MNS and EP-M

Thanks for the fix to Autism #Pathophysiology's discussion of the MNS theory of autism. I noticed that the change downplayed Hamilton 2008 (PMID 18038342), in the sense that it removed all discussion of the EP-M theory, replacing the discussion with the relatively uninformative statement "the MNS hypothesis of autism has been criticised". I took the liberty of changing the statement to the more-specific "the MNS theory does not explain the normal performance of autistic children on imitation tasks that involve a goal or object", which I hope accurately captures the main thrust of Hamilton's criticism. However, I'm wondering why it's not appropriate to discuss the EP-M model in Autism? Is EP-M still too bleeding-edge or controversial or not-yet-widespread or something like that? Eubulides (talk) 20:38, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I thought EP-M was too new to feature prominently. But it may become more widely recognised soon. AFdeCH (talk) 16:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Goals, intentions and mental states

I just now read Hamilton's recently published research review (PMID 19508497) on goals, intentions, and mental states in autism, and attempted to summarize it with an edit to Wikipedia's Autism article. I would welcome your further comments or improvements to the article. Eubulides (talk) 23:58, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is great. I just clarified a bit AFdeCH (talk) 20:33, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]