Damasio et. al (1994) The Return of Phineas Gage

Question 1

Aims of the Study:

Answer 1

• To identify which parts of the brain had been damaged
• To discover if areas other than the frontal lobe had been damaged

Question 2

Procedure of the Study:

Answer 2

• They took pictures and measurements of the skull
• They built a 3D replica of a skull that matched measurements
• They matched up possible entry and exit points of the iron rod (20 entry, 16 exit)
• After finding out five most likely points, they used the replica and mapped out areas that would have been damaged

Question 3

Results:

Answer 3

• There was damage to the left and right hemisphere
  -There was extreme damage to the white matter (brain and spinal cord tissues, which have lots of nerve fibres)
• There was damage to the middle of the hemisphere (Ventromedial Region)

Question 4

Conclusion:

Answer 4

• Ventromedial Region is important to make decisions and to control impulses and emotions

Question 5

Strengths:

Answer 5

• This study is based on a real life case on brain damage and is valid
• Researchers used modern day technology to investigate old data records, study is scientific
• We can predict what behaviour to expect if someone has damaged the frontal lobe in the same area.

Question 6

Weaknesses:

Answer 6

• Information on the accident were on reports based 150 years ago, they might not be accurate or reliable.
• Lack of generalisability, it is unlikely that someone else will have the same damage as Phineas Gage.