how was the holistic theory of brain function disproved?
the case study of phineas gage and the work of broca, wernicke and tulving all showed that different parts of the brain perform differentfunctions and if one becomes damaged, the jobs done by that area will be affected
contains the motor cortex (back of the frontal lobes) which is responsible for producing voluntarymotor movements, the motor cortex on one side of the brain controls muscles on opposite side of the body
contains the somatosensory cortex (front of the parietal lobes) which processes sensory info from the skin (touch, pain etc.) and the somatosensory cortex on one side of the brain processes sensory info on opposite side of the body
contains the visual cortex (back of the occipital lobes) where righthemisphere receives input from the leftvisualfield (light from left of body hits right side of both eyes) and the left hemisphere receives its input from the right visual field (light from right of body hits left part of each eye)
what was the conclusion of broca's study with tan?
tan understood spoken language but couldn't speak/express thoughts in writing - broca found that tan and 8 patients with similar language problems suffered damage to their leftfrontalhemisphere. patients with damage to rightfrontalhemisphere didn't have the same problems. broca concluded that a languagecentre is present in the back of the frontal lobe of the left hemisphere, which is critical for speechproduction
what is the law of equipotentiality and how does it relate to localisation of function in the brain?
every part of the brain has equalpotential to carry out every task (whereas localisation suggests particular parts of the brain are responsible for particular jobs)
what is a negative evaluation point for localisation of function in the brain?
contradictoryresearch to suggest complex activities involve the entirebrain - lashley removed 10-50% of brain of rats learning a maze. no one area was more important than another in the rats' ability to learn it, they were equally as disabled so the theory may lack validity
challenged by neural plasticity - strokevictims regain abilities they lost due to it (law of equipotentiality) so the theory may lack validity