- Evaluation of Shmolck
- Case Study
- of brain-damaged patients are rare and therefore small in number
- The small sample size involved in this investigation limits the generalisability of the conclusions made.
- Individual differences.
- The special case of HM reported in this investigation was seen as a product of upbringing and events prior to his surgery for epilepsy
- However, it could be argued that the individual differences found in this investigation demonstrate individual variation in neurology which may account for the differences between them.
- Retrospective research
- cannot establish causal relationships between the injury sustained and the resulting impairments tested.
- The brain is adaptable and can compensate for injury
- •The findings of tests may reflect the ability of the brain to adapt to injury rather than the injury itself.
- Lack of ecological validity
- the stimuli
that are common to many cognitive investigations used to test semantic
knowledge, lack mundane realism and may not tap
into semantic knowledge as it is used in everyday life.
- An example of a test for semantic knowledge is the line drawing test that was used.
- Such research may be said to lack ecological validity, as the findings cannot be generalised to everyday use of semantic memory.
- the stimuli that are common to many cognitive investigations used to test semantic knowledge, lack mundane realism and may not tap into semantic knowledge as it is used in everyday life.
- Case Study