What Can Studies of Brain-Damaged Patients Tell Us That Other Methods Can't?
Contemporary Psychology / PsycCRITIQUES
Patient-based studies have played a pivotal role in developing theories of brain and cognitive functioning. In the 19th century, patient-based studies championed the notion that mental functions could be localized and in the last 30 years or so they have been used to uncover the fine-grained structure of cognition. Farah and Feinberg have assembled an impressive review of this literature covering topics from traditional neuropsychological areas such as aphasia, agnosia, and amnesia through less-studied areas such as acalculia, disorders of body representation, and amusia. The aim of this review is to evaluate critically the assumptions behind the patient-based approach, contrasting it with other approaches and drawing on evidence presented in the various chapters in the book. Times have changed: Functional imaging and other methods have become the darling of cognitive neuroscientists. It is, therefore, worthwhile to speculate as to how patient-based studies will sit alongside such methods and whether patient-based studies will, in fact, be supplanted by them.
|Title:||What Can Studies of Brain-Damaged Patients Tell Us That Other Methods Can't?|
|UCL classification:||UCL > School of Life and Medical Sciences
UCL > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Brain Sciences
UCL > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Brain Sciences > Psychology and Language Sciences (Division of) > Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience
UCL > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Life Sciences
Archive Staff Only