Structural connectivity between the hippocampus and cortical/subcortical area relates to cognitive impairment in schizophrenia but not in mood disorders

Cognitive impairment in schizophrenia and other psychiatric disorders is a challenge to be overcome in order to maintain patients' quality of life and social function. The neurological pathogenesis of cognitive impairment requires further elucidation. In general, the hippocampus interacts between the cortical and subcortical areas for information processing and consolidation and has an important role in memory. We examined the relationship between structural connectivity of the hippocampus and cortical/subcortical areas and cognitive impairment in schizophrenia, major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder. Subjects comprised 21 healthy controls, 19 patients with schizophrenia, 20 patients with bipolar disorder and 18 patients with major depressive disorder. Diffusion-weighted tensor images data were processed using ProbtrackX2 to calculate the structural connectivity between the hippocampus and cortical/subcortical areas. Cognitive function was assessed using the Brief Assessment of Cognition in schizophrenia composite score. Hippocampal structural connectivity index was significantly correlated with composite score in the schizophrenia group but not in the healthy control, major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder groups. There were no statistically significant differences in hippocampal structural connectivity index between the four groups. Structural connectivity between the hippocampus and cortical/subcortical areas is suggested to be a pathophysiological mechanism of comprehensive cognitive impairment in schizophrenia.     

Grading the ‘cultural literacy’ project

The essay examines the argument advanced by E.D. Hirsch, Jr., for instituting ‘cultural literacy’ as a fundamental priority of schools. A number of confusions and equivocations in Hirsch's reasoning are identified, and the propensity of his project to indoctrinate is exposed. Among the features of Hirsch's argument shown to be troubling are his shifting construal of ‘language’, his inconsistency about the requirements of cultural literacy, and his uncritical relation to traditional images of the American past and present. The upshot is to raise the question why Hirsch's project has elicited wide support and praise.