Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-09T00:54:07.948Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Investigation into Intellectual Changes Following Prefrontal Leucotomy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2018

R. K. Freudenberg  and
J. P. S. Robertson
R. K. Freudenberg
Affiliation:
Netherne Hospital, Coulsdon, Surrey
J. P. S. Robertson
Affiliation:
Netherne Hospital, Coulsdon, Surrey
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This investigation is not concerned with the clinical indications or results of prefrontal leucotomy, but attempts to re-examine changes following the operation, especially in regard to the impairment of some of the manifestations of the highest integrative psychophysiological functions of the central nervous system that may bring about such alterations. Amongst these we were primarily interested in cognitive changes, but the interpretation of apparent cognitive changes led to the consideration of orectic alterations as well. Such changes have so far been impossible to localize exactly, but are considered to be partly related to the phylogenetically more recent parts of the cerebral cortex. Masserman (1946) compared the mechanism of shock treatment and leucotomy with the effects of alcohol and states that “its main actions are those of a cortical depressant,” as manifested by impairment of finer perceptions and discriminations and a “constriction of the integrative field.” He believes that shock therapies and leucotomy partly produce their results by temporary or permanent decorticating effects, “rendering the individual no longer capable of fine spun fantasies or elaborate delusions.” These decorticating effects can be assumed to be reflected in cognitive, conative and emotional alterations following the operation. The interpretation of change following leucotomy presents many difficulties, one of them being that only dysfunction can be related to structural damage of the frontal lobe and not function. Another is that psychotics or severe neurotics operated upon usually do not have a sufficiently intact pre-operative personality to draw conclusions about the normal functions.

Type
Part I.—Original Articles
Information
Journal of Mental Science , Volume 95 , Issue 401 , October 1949 , pp. 826 - 841
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1949 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bender, L., “A Visual Motor Gestalt and its Clinical Use,” Res. Monogr. Amer. Orthopsych. A, No. 3.Google Scholar
Brain, Russell W. (1949), Psychiatry and Neurology in Modern Practice in Psychological Medicine, p. 135. Butterworth & Co., London.Google Scholar
Brody, E. B., and Moore, B. E. (1946), “Prefrontal Lobotomy.” A Review on Recent Literature,” Conn. State med. J., 10, 409–421.Google Scholar
Clark, W. E. le Gros (1948), “Connections of the Frontal Lobe,” Lancet, 1, 353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cobb, S. (1948), Foundations of Neuropsychiatry. Williams and Wilkins.Google Scholar
Dax, E. C., and Radley Smith, E. J. (1948) Brit. J. Surg., 36, 74–78.Google Scholar
Freeman, W., and Watts, J. W. (1942), Psychosurgery. Chas. C. Thomas. Springfield, Illinois.Google Scholar
Freeman, W., and Watts, J. W. (1944), “Physiological Psychology,” Ann. Rev. Physiol., 6, 517–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, K. (1936), “The Significance of the Frontal Lobes for Mental Performance,” J. Neurol. Psychopath., 17, 27–40.Google Scholar
Goldstein, K. (1944), “The Mental Changes due to Frontal Lobe Damage,” J. Psychol., 17, 187–208.Google Scholar
Goldstein, K. and Scheerer, M. (1941), “Abstract and Concrete Behavior; An Experimental Study with Special Mental Tests,” Psychol. Monogr., 53, 1–151.Google Scholar
Halstead, W. C. (1947), Brain and Intelligence. Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Hanfman, E. and Kasanin, J. (1942), “Conceptual Thinking in Schizophrenia,” Nerv. and Ment. Dis. Monogr., New York.Google Scholar
Hutton, E. L. (1942), “The Investigation of Personality on Patients Treated by Prefrontal Leucotomy,” J. Ment. Sci., 88, 275–281.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, C. F. (1936), “Studies of Cerebral Function in Primates. The Functions of the Frontal Association Areas in Monkeys,” Comp. Psych. Monogr., 13, 3, 1–60.Google Scholar
See also Crawford, M., Fulton, J. F., Jacobsen, C. F., Wolfe, J. B. (1948), “Frontal Lobe Ablation in Chimpanzee,” A.N.M.D., p. 3.Google Scholar
Kisker, G. W. (1944), “Abstract and Categorical Behavior following Lobotomy,” Psychosom. Med., 6, 146–150.Google Scholar
Koskoff, Y. D., Dennis, W., Lazovik, D., and Wheeler, E. T. (1948), “Psychological Effects of Frontal Lobotomy performed for the Alleviation of Pain,” Frontal Lobes, p. 723. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore.Google Scholar
Malmo, R. B. (1948), “Psychological Aspects of Frontal Gyrectomy and Frontal Lobotomy in Mental Patients” Frontal Lobes, p. 537. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore.Google Scholar
Masserman, J. H. (1946), Principles of Dynamic Psychiatry. W. B. Saunders.Google Scholar
Martin, J. Purdon, 1949, “Consciousness and its Disturbances,” Lancet, cclvi, 1–6. 48–53.Google Scholar
Penfield, W. (1935), “The Frontal Lobe in Man,” Brain, 58, 115–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porteus, S. D., and Kepner, R. D. (1944), “Mental Changes after Bilateral Prefrontal Lobotomy,” Genet. Psychol. Monogr., 29, 3–115.Google Scholar
Rinkel, M., Greenblatt, M., Coon, G. P., Solomon, H. C. (1947), “Effect of Bilateral Frontal Lobotomy on Autonomic Nervous System,” Am. J. Psych., 104, 81, 82.Google Scholar
Reitman, F. (1947), “Observations on Personality Changes following Leucotomy,” J. Nerv. and Ment. Dis., 105, 582, 589.Google Scholar
Reitman, F. (1947), “Leucotomy as an Instrument of Research,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Med., 40, 147–149.Google Scholar
Reitman, F. (1945), “Autonomic Responses in Prefrontal Leucotomy,” J. Ment. Sci. 91, 318–321.Google Scholar
Reitman, F. (1948), “Evaluation of Leucotomy Results,” Am. J. Psych., 105, 860–889.Google Scholar
Robinson, M. F. (1946), “What Price Lobotomy?” J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol., 41, 421–436.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rylander, G. (1948), “Personality Before and After Frontal Lobotomy,” A.R.N.M.D., Frontal Lobes, p. 691. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore.Google Scholar
Yacorzynski, G. K., Boshes, B., and Davis, L. (1948), “Psychological Changes Produced by Frontal Lobotomy,” Frontal Lobes, p. 642. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.