Home > Journals > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine > Past Issues > Europa Medicophysica 1998 June;34(2) > Europa Medicophysica 1998 June;34(2):97-102

CURRENT ISSUE
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL AND REHABILITATION MEDICINE

A Journal on Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation after Pathological Events


Official Journal of the Italian Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (SIMFER), European Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (ESPRM), European Union of Medical Specialists - Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Section (UEMS-PRM), Mediterranean Forum of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (MFPRM), Hellenic Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (EEFIAP)
In association with International Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (ISPRM)
Indexed/Abstracted in: CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,063


eTOC

 

CASE REPORTS  


Europa Medicophysica 1998 June;34(2):97-102

language: English

Impaired pro­cess­ing in vis­u­al ­object rec­og­ni­tion. A sin­gle ­case ­study

Granà A. 1, Gattinoni F. 2, Di Benedetto P. 2

1 Department of Psychology, University of Trieste, Italy;
2 Rehabilitation Center, Azienda Ospedaliera “Ospedali Riuniti”, Trieste, Italy


FULL TEXT  


Object rec­og­ni­tion is a com­plex abil­ity ­which ­involves the inter­play of a num­ber of dif­fer­ent func­tion­al com­po­nents (e.g. ­size, orien­ta­tion, dif­fer­ent ­types of ­stored knowl­edge). In ­this ­paper we ­report the ­case of S.G., a ­brain-dam­aged ­patient ­whose vis­u­al ­object rec­og­ni­tion def­i­cit was ­assessed and eval­u­at­ed ­with ref­er­ence to the func­tion­al mod­el pro­posed by Riddoch and Humphreys (­BORB). According to the pro­posed frame­work, S.G. had no dif­fi­cul­ties in encod­ing or link­ing togeth­er pre-cat­e­gor­i­cal fea­tures of vis­u­al pro­cess­ing, nor in rec­og­nis­ing an ­object ­viewed ­from an unusu­al pros­pec­tive. Her abil­ity to ­retrieve func­tion­al char­ac­ter­is­tics and asso­ci­a­tions ­between relat­ed ­objects ­appeared to be ­well pre­served. By con­trast, S.G. ­failed in com­par­ing the ­shape of pre­sent­ed ­objects ­with the ­shape of ­known ­objects; her ­object draw­ing ­from mem­o­ry was ­poor as was her nam­ing. This def­i­cit was inter­pret­ed as an impair­ment at the lev­el of ­stored knowl­edge of ­shapes. An addi­tion­al def­i­cit in ­name retriev­al was detect­ed. The ­authors empha­sise the impor­tance of mak­ing ref­er­ence to a func­tion­al mod­el in ­order to eval­u­ate and inter­pret the pat­tern of ­acquired cog­ni­tive dis­or­ders in ­terms of a spe­cif­ic “func­tion­al ­lesion” of a sin­gle or mul­ti­ple com­po­nents of the cog­ni­tive ­system. For ­this pur­pose, ­both quan­ti­ta­tive and qual­ita­tive infor­ma­tion of pre­served and ­impaired capa­bil­ities ­must be tak­en ­into ­account.

top of page

Publication History

Cite this article as

Corresponding author e-mail