Cognitive Neuropsychology and Developmental Disorders: Uncomfortable Bedfellows

Cognitive neuropsychology provides a theoretical framework and methods that can be of value in the study of developmental disorders, but the "dissociation" logic at the centre of this approach is not well suited to the developmental context. This is illustrated with examples from specific language impairment. Within the developing language system there is ample evidence for interaction between levels of representation, with modularity emerging in the course of development. This means that one typically is seeking to explain a complex pattern of associated impairments, rather than highly selective deficits. For instance, a selective impairment in auditory processing can have repercussions through the language system and may lead to distinctive syntactic deficits that are seen in written as well as spoken language. Changes in the nature of representations and in the relationships between components of a developing system mean that cross-sectional data at a single point in development may be misleading indicators of the primary deficit. Furthermore, traditional cognitive neuropsychology places a disproportionate emphasis on representational (competence) deficits, with processing (performance) deficits being relatively neglected. Methods for distinguishing these two kinds of impairment are discussed, as well as other approaches for elucidating the underlying nature of developmental disorders.     

Delayed-matching-to-sample by marsh tits and great tits

The ability of two species of tits to remember the location and/or features of an object was tested in a delayed-matching-to-sample procedure. Three values of retention interval between presentation of the sample stimulus and the choice--30 sec, 5 min, and 15 min--were used. Both species performed at above-chance level at all retention intervals, and there was no significant decline in accuracy with increasing interval. A pool of 100 stimulus objects was used, but the results of control trials indicated that the birds responded primarily to location rather than stimulus features of the object itseif. Although the food-storing marsh tit tended to perform at a higher level than the non-storing great tit, the only significant difference between the species was in the first 50 trials of the first treatment, when the birds were acquiring the task. The results are discussed in relation to the hypothesized special memory capacity of food-storing birds.