Facial agnosia in the clinical presentations of brain lesions
Abstract
Facial agnosia (prosopagnosia) is one of the causes of limitations in the life of patients with focal vascular, inflammatory, traumatic, and tumor lesions of the brain; however, the clinical significance of these lesions in neurological practice is often underestimated.
The review briefly presents the current understanding of the neurophysiological basis of facial gnosis and its neuroanatomic correlates. It discusses the clinical variants of prosopagnosia, the features of neuropsychological diagnosis, and adopted approaches to patient rehabilitation. It also highlights the importance of developing standardized methods for facial agnosia to improve the detection of prosopagnosia in focal brain lesions.
About the Authors
V. N. Grigoryeva
Volga Research Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
10/1, Minin and Pozharsky Square, Nizhny Novgorod 603005
K. A. Mashkovich
Volga Research Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ksenia Aleksandrovna Mashkovich
10/1, Minin and Pozharsky Square, Nizhny Novgorod 603005
References
1. Lunya AR. Osnovy neiropsikhologii. Uchebnoeposobie dlya studentov uchrezhdenii vysshegoprofessionalnogo obrazo-vaniya [Fundamentals of neuropsychology. Text book for students of higher professional education institutions]. Moscow: Akademiya; 2013. 384 p.
2. Vizel' TG. Osnovy neirop-sikhologii. Uchebnik dlya studentov VUZov [Fundamentals of neuropsychology. Textbook for University students.]. Moscow: IP Sekachev V.Yu.; 2017. 276 p.
3. Corrow SL, Dalrymple KA, Barton JJ. Prosopagnosia: current perspectives. Eye Brain. 2016 Sep 26;8:165-75. doi: 10.2147/EB.S92838.
4. Gerlach C, Klargaard SK, Petersen A, et al. Delayed processing of global shape information in developmental prosopagnosia. PLoS One. 2017 Dec 20;12(12):e0189253. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189253.
5. Strappini F, Pelli DG, Di Pace E, et al. Agnosic vision is like peripheral vision, which is limited by crowding. Cortex. 2017 Apr;89:135-55. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2017.01.012.
6. Chandra SR, Patwardhan K, Pai AR. Problems of Face Recognition in Patients with Behavioral Variant Frontotemporal Dementia. Indian J Psychol Med. 2017 Sep-Oct;39(5):653-8. doi:10.4103/IJPSYM.UPSYM_90_17.
7. Riddoch MJ, Johnston RA, Bracewell RM, et al. Are faces special? A case of pure prosopagnosia. Cogn Neuropsychol. 2008 Feb;25(1):3-26. doi: 10.1080/02643290801920113.
8. Negrini M, Brkic D, Pizzamiglio S, et al. Neurophysiological Correlates of Featural and Spacing Processing for Face and Non-face Stimuli. Front Psychol. 2017 Mar 13;8:333. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00333.
9. Bukach CM, Bub DN, Gauthier I, et al. Perceptual Expertise Effects Are Not All or None: Spatially Limited Perceptual Expertise for Faces in a Case of Prosopagnosia. J Cogn Neurosci. 2006 Jan;18(1):48-63. doi: 10.1162/089892906775250094.
10. Roberts DJ, Lambon Ralph MA, Kim E, et al. Processing deficits for familiar and novel faces in patients with left posterior fusiform lesions. Cortex. 2015;72:79-96. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2015.02.003.
11. Barabanshchikov VA. The communicative approach in perception studies. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal. 2012;(3):17-32. (In Russ.).
12. Barton JJ, Corrow SL. Recognizing and identifying people: a neuropsychological review. Cortex. 2016 Feb;75:132-150. doi: 10.1016/j.cor-tex.2015.11.023. Epub 2015 Dec 25.
13. Aggleton JP, Dumont JR, Warburton EC. Unraveling the contributions of the diencephalon to recognition memory: A review. Learn Mem. 2011 May 19;18(6):384-400. doi:10.1101/lm.1884611.
14. Baars B, Geidzh N. Mozg, poznanie, razum: vvedenie v kognitivnye neironauki. Chast' 1 [Brain, cognition, mind: an introduction to cognitive neuroscience. Part 1]. Moscow: BINOM; 2014. 541 p.
15. Renzi C, Schiavi S, Carbon CC, et al. Processing of featural and configural aspects of faces is lateralized in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex: a TMS study. Neuroimage. 2013 Jul 1;74: 45-51. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.02.015. Epub 2013 Feb 20.
16. Robotham RJ, Starrfelt R. Face and word recognition can be selectively affected by brain injury or developmental disorders. Front Psychol. 2017 Sep 6;8:1547. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01547.
17. Geskin J, Behrmann M. Congenital prosopagnosia without object agnosia? A literature review. Cogn Neuropsychol. 2018 Feb - Mar;35(1-2):4-54. doi: 10.1080/02643294.2017.1392295.
18. Susilo T, Yovel G, Barton JJ, et al. Face perception is category-specific: evidence from normal body perception in acquired prosopagnosia. Cognition. 2013 Oct;129(1):88-94. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.06.004.
19. Wong YK, Folstein JR, Gauthier I. The nature of experience determines object representations in the visual system. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2012 Nov; 141(4):682-98. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0027822.
20. Chinello A, Cattani V, Bonfiglioli C, et al. Objects, numbers, fingers, space: clustering of ventral and dorsal functions in young children and adults. Dev Sci. 2013 May;16(3):377-93. doi: 10.1111/desc.12028.
21. Duchaine B, Nakayama K. The Cambridge Face Memory Test: results from neurologically intact individuals and an investigation of its validity using inverted stimuli and prosopagnosic participants. Neuropsychologia. 2006;44(4):576-85. Epub 2005 Sep 19. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsycholo-gia.2005.07.001
22. Russell R, Duchaine B, Nakayama K. Superrecognizers: people with extraordinary face recognition ability. Psychon Bull Rev. 2009 Apr;16(2): 252-7. doi: 10.3758/PBR.16.2.252.
23. Tursunov VV. Comprehension of face cognition in modern science. Lichnost'v menyayushchemsya mire: zdorove, adaptatsiya, razvitie. 2017;5(3):287-301. (In Russ.).
24. Rossion B, Michel C. Normative accuracy and response time data for the computerized Benton Facial Recognition Test (BFRT-c). Behav Res Methods. 2018 Mar 16;50:1-19. doi:10.3758/s13428-018-1023-x.
25. Duchaine B, Yovel G, Nakayama K. No global processing deficit in the Navon task in 14 developmental prosopagnosics. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2007 Jun;2(2):104-13. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsm003.
26. Burton A, White D, McNeill A. The Glasgow Face Matching Test. Behav Res Methods. 2010 Feb;42(1):286-91. doi: 10.3758/BRM.42.1.286.
27. Rivolta D, Palermo R, Schmalzl L. What is overt and what is covert in congenital prosopagnosia? Neuropsychol Rev. 2013 Jun;23(2):111-6. doi: 10.1007/s11065-012-9223-0.
28. Eimer M, Gosling A, Duchaine B. Electrophysiological markers of covert face recognition in developmental prosopagnosia. Brain. 2012 Feb;135(Pt 2):542-54. doi: 10.1093/brain/awr347.
29. Barton JJ, Hanif H, Ashraf S. Relating visual to verbal semantic knowledge: the evaluation of object recognition in prosopagnosia. Brain. 2009; 132(Pt 12):3456-66. doi:10.1093/brain/awp252.
30. DeGutis JM, Chiu C, Grosso ME, et al. Face processing improvements in prosopagnosia: successes and failures over the last 50 years. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 Aug 5;8:561. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00561.eCollection 2014.
31. Bate S, Bennetts RJ. The rehabilitation of face recognition impairments: a critical review and future directions. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 Jul 23;8:491. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00491.eCollection2014.
For citation:
Grigoryeva V.N., Mashkovich K.A. Facial agnosia in the clinical presentations of brain lesions. Neurology, Neuropsychiatry, Psychosomatics. 2018;10(4):111-115. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.14412/2074-2711-2018-4-111-115
Views: 1009
Email this article 