Clive Wearing Case Study

• What did Clive Wearing suffer from?


  A severe case of anterograde and retrograde amnesia
• What was the aim of the study?

  To report of the case of CW, who suffers from a severe case of anterograde and retrograde amnesia
• How long was the case study?

  Longitudinal, 21 years
• What types of data were collected?

  Both qualitative and quantitative
• Sample of the study

  Clive Wearing, born in the UK in 1938.

  He was an outstanding musician
• What are the 2 materials of the study?

  1. Neuropsychological tests - IQ tests, tests of verbal fluency, digit span test (all tested his STM and LTM)
  2. MRI scans of his brain (1991, 2006)
• What were the 3 neuropsychological tests and what were they for?


  1. IQ tests
  2. Tests of verbal fluency
  3. Digit span test

  All tested his STM and LTM
• What virus did CW develop, and what happened after?


  Herpes simplex encephalitis.

  He was given lifesaving medication but large parts of his brain had been destroyed
• Results of his IQ test?


  Average

  (but considering he was extremely gifted before, his IQ is probably poorer than before)
• 4 conclusions of the study

  1. Herpes simplex encephalitis can result in brain damage
  2. Brain damage can result in both anterograde and retrograde amnesia
  3. Supports the MSM, that STM and LTM are separate stores (CW had some loss of semantic, damaged episodic memory, inability to form new memories)
  4. CW's sense of self was disrupted by his memory disorder (could still play piano, recognise family, conduct orchestra, read write+talk)(decreased performance and verbal IQ)
• Criticisms of the study?

  1. No proper consent was given. He may have provided consent but he would not remember so he could not truly understand what he was consenting to.
  2. Caused psychological distress - repeatedly tested on over 21 years, irritation was caused due to having his consciousness questioned.
  3. Confidentiality was not maintained - identity was revealed as his full name and background were included
  4. Hard to generalise results as this was a unique case study + large extent of brain damage