| Literature DB >> 24834048 |
Emma Gregory1, Michael McCloskey1, Barbara Landau1.
Abstract
Studies of retrograde amnesia have focused on autobiographical memory, with fewer studies examining how non-autobiographical memory is affected. Those that have done so have focused primarily on memory for famous people and public events-relatively limited aspects of memory that are tied to learning during specific times of life and do not deeply tap into the rich and extensive knowledge structures that are developed over a lifetime. To assess whether retrograde amnesia can also cause impairments to other forms of general world knowledge, we explored losses across a broad range of knowledge domains in a newly-identified amnesic. LSJ is a professional artist, amateur musician and history buff with extensive bilateral medial temporal and left anterior temporal damage. We examined LSJ's knowledge across a range of everyday domains (e.g., sports) and domains for which she had premorbid expertise (e.g., famous paintings). Across all domains tested, LSJ showed losses of knowledge at a level of breadth and depth never before documented in retrograde amnesia. These results show that retrograde amnesia can involve broad and deep deficits across a range of general world knowledge domains. Thus, losses that have already been well-documented (famous people and public events) may severely underestimate the nature of human knowledge impairment that can occur in retrograde amnesia.Entities:
Keywords: brain damage; general world knowledge; memory; retrograde amnesia; single case study
Year: 2014 PMID: 24834048 PMCID: PMC4018544 DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00287
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Hum Neurosci ISSN: 1662-5161 Impact factor: 3.169
Figure 1High resolution magnetic resonance images showing the extent of temporal lobe damage in patient LSJ. See text for description of lesion.
Neuropsychological profile of patient LSJ.
| Full Scale | 92 | 30th percentile |
| Verbal comprehension | 96 | 39th percentile |
| Perceptual reasoning | 104 | 55th percentile |
| Working memory | 83 | 13th percentile |
| Processing Speed | 86 | 18th percentile |
| Auditory immediate | 56 | 0.2 Percentile; impaired |
| Visual immediate | 57 | 0.2 Percentile; impaired |
| Immediate memory | 47 | <0.1 Percentile; impaired |
| Auditory delayed | 58 | 0.3 Percentile; impaired |
| Visual delayed | 56 | 0.2 Percentile; impaired |
| Auditory recognition delayed | 55 | 0.1 Percentile; impaired |
| General memory | 47 | <0.1 Percentile; impaired |
| Working memory | 76 | 5th percentile; impaired |
| Words (/50) | 26 | Impaired |
| Faces (/50) | 28 | Impaired |
| Copy (/36) | 34 | |
| Delayed recall (10 min, /36) | 0 | Impaired |
| Boston naming test (/60) | 49 | Normal adult 50–59 years old: mean = 55.8, |
| Reading | 103 (58th percentile) | Average |
| Spelling | 102 (55th percentile) | Average |
| Peabody picture vocabulary test—revised (PPVT) | 97 (42nd percentile) | Average |
| Screening test (/20) | 20 | Pass |
| Incomplete letters (/20) | 20 | Pass |
| Silhouettes (/20) | 16 | Pass |
| Progressive silhouettes (High Score = 2) | 10 | Pass |
| Dot counting (/10) | 10 | Pass |
| Position discrmination (/20) | 20 | Pass |
| Number location (/10) | 9 | Pass |
| Cube analysis (/10) | 9 | Pass |
| Canonical viewpoint (/39) | 38 | Average (Control mean/40 = 39.6; |
| Unusual viewpoint (/40) | 32 | Average (Control mean = 36.5; |
| Benton facial recognition test | 46 | Normal range = 41–54 |
| Recognition of famous landmarks (/26) | 2 | Impaired (Control mean = 18.2; |
| Recognition of famous faces (/60) | 2 | Impaired (Control mean = 52.6; |
| Scale | 25 | Pass |
| Contour | 25 | Pass |
| Interval | 27 | Pass |
| Rhythm | 26 | Pass |
| Meter | 28 | Pass |
| Incidental | 16 | Fail |
Figure 2LSJ's and controls' performance on everyday and expert knowledge domain recognition and recall tests. The red bar represents LSJ's average score across two administrations of a test, the gray rectangle represents the control range, and the black bar represents the controls' mean score.