Hemispheric asymmetry is commonly viewed as a dual system, unique to humans, with the two sides of the human brain in complementary roles. To the contrary, modern research shows that cerebral and behavioral asymmetries are widespread in the animal kingdom, and that the concept of duality is an oversimplification. The brain has many networks serving different functions; these are differentially lateralized, and involve many genes. Unlike the asymmetries of the internal organs, brain asymmetry is variable, with a significant minority of the population showing reversed asymmetries or the absence of asymmetry. This variability may underlie the divisions of labor and the specializations that sustain social life. (JINS, 2017, 23, 710–718)

Thirty years ago, the neuropsychology of emotion started to emerge as a mainstream topic. Careful examination of individual patients showed that emotion, like memory, language, and so on, could be differentially affected by brain disorders, especially in the right hemisphere. Since then, there has been accelerating interest in uncovering the neural architecture of emotion, and the major steps in this process of discovery over the past 3 decades are detailed in this review. In the 1990s, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans provided precise delineation of lesions in the amygdala, medial prefrontal cortex, insula and somatosensory cortex as underpinning emotion disorders. At the same time, functional MRI revealed activation that was bilateral and also lateralized according to task demands. In the 2000s, converging evidence suggested at least two routes to emotional responses: subcortical, automatic and autonomic responses and slower, cortical responses mediating cognitive processing. The discovery of mirror neurons in the 1990s reinvigorated older views that simulation was the means to recognize emotions and empathize with others. More recently, psychophysiological research, revisiting older Russian paradigms, has contributed new insights into how autonomic and other physiological indices contribute to decision making (the somatic marker theory), emotional simulation, and social cognition. Finally, this review considers the extent to which these seismic changes in understanding emotional processes in clinical disorders have been reflected in neuropsychological practice. (JINS, 2017, 23, 719–731)

The past 30 years of research on human amnesia has yielded important changes in our understanding of the role of the medial temporal lobes (MTL) in memory. On the one hand, this body of evidence has highlighted that not all types of memory are impaired in patients with MTL lesions. On the other hand, this research has made apparent that the role of the MTL extends beyond the domain of long-term memory, to include working memory, perception, and future thinking. In this article, we review the discoveries and controversies that have characterized this literature and that set the stage for a new conceptualization of the role of the MTL in cognition. This shift toward a more nuanced understanding of MTL function has direct relevance for a range of clinical disorders in which the MTL is implicated, potentially shaping not only theoretical understanding but also clinical practice. (JINS, 2017, 23, 732–740)

Studies of language disorders have shaped our understanding of brain–language relationships over the last two centuries. This article provides a review of this research and how our thinking has changed over the years regarding how the brain processes language. In the 19th century, a series of famous case studies linked distinct speech and language functions to specific portions of the left hemisphere of the brain, regions that later came to be known as Broca’s and Wernicke’s areas. One hundred years later, the emergence of new brain imaging tools allowed for the visualization of brain injuries in vivo that ushered in a new era of brain-behavior research and greatly expanded our understanding of the neural processes of language. Toward the end of the 20th century, sophisticated neuroimaging approaches allowed for the visualization of both structural and functional brain activity associated with language processing in both healthy individuals and in those with language disturbance. More recently, language is thought to be mediated by a much broader expanse of neural networks that covers a large number of cortical and subcortical regions and their interconnecting fiber pathways. Injury to both grey and white matter has been seen to affect the complexities of language in unique ways that have altered how we think about brain–language relationships. The findings that support this paradigm shift are described here along with the methodologies that helped to discover them, with some final thoughts on future directions, techniques, and treatment interventions for those with communication impairments. (JINS, 2017, 23, 741–754)

Our knowledge of the functions of the prefrontal cortex, often called executive, supervisory, or control, has been transformed over the past 50 years. After operationally defining terms for clarification, we review the impact of advances in functional, structural, and theoretical levels of understanding upon neuropsychological assessment practice as a means of identifying 11 principles/challenges relating to assessment of executive function. Three of these were already known 50 years ago, and 8 have been confirmed or emerged since. Key themes over this period have been the emergence of the use of naturalistic tests to address issues of “ecological validity”; discovery of the complexity of the frontal lobe control system; invention of new tests for clinical use; development of key theoretical frameworks that address the issue of the role of prefrontal cortex systems in the organization of human cognition; the move toward considering brain systems rather than brain regions; the advent of functional neuroimaging, and its emerging integration into clinical practice. Despite these huge advances, however, practicing neuropsychologists are still desperately in need of new ways of measuring executive function. We discuss pathways by which this might happen, including decoupling the two levels of explanation (information processing; brain structure) and integrating very recent technological advances into the neuropsychologist’s toolbox. (JINS, 2017, 23, 755–767)

This paper highlights major developments over the past two to three decades in the neuropsychology of movement and its disorders. We focus on studies in healthy individuals and patients, which have identified cognitive contributions to movement control and animal work that has delineated the neural circuitry that makes these interactions possible. We cover advances in three major areas: (1) the neuroanatomical aspects of the “motor” system with an emphasis on multiple parallel circuits that include cortical, corticostriate, and corticocerebellar connections; (2) behavioral paradigms that have enabled an appreciation of the cognitive influences on the preparation and execution of movement; and (3) hemispheric differences (exemplified by limb praxis, motor sequencing, and motor learning). Finally, we discuss the clinical implications of this work, and make suggestions for future research in this area. (JINS, 2017, 23, 768–777)

Neuropsychological assessment tools are the staple of our field. The development of standardized metrics sensitive to brain-behavior relationships has shaped the neuropsychological questions we can ask, our understanding of discrete brain functions, and has informed the detection and treatment of neurological disorders. We identify key turning points and innovations in neuropsychological assessment over the past 40–50 years that highlight how the tools used in common practice today came to be. Also selected for emphasis are several exciting lines of research and novel approaches that are underway to further probe and characterize brain functions to enhance diagnostic and treatment outcomes. We provide a brief historical review of different clinical neuropsychological assessment approaches (Lurian, Flexible and Fixed Batteries, Boston Process Approach) and critical developments that have influenced their interpretation (normative standards, cultural considerations, longitudinal change, common metric batteries, and translational assessment constructs). Lastly, we discuss growing trends in assessment including technological advances, efforts to integrate neuropsychology across disciplines (e.g., primary care), and changes in neuropsychological assessment infrastructure. Neuropsychological assessment has undergone massive growth in the past several decades. Nonetheless, there remain many unanswered questions and future challenges to better support measurement tools and translate assessment findings into meaningful recommendations and treatments. As technology and our understanding of brain function advance, efforts to support infrastructure for both traditional and novel assessment approaches and integration of complementary brain assessment tools from other disciplines will be integral to inform brain health treatments and promote the growth of our field. (JINS, 2017, 23, 778–790)

This article reviews the major paradigm shifts that have occurred in the area of the application of clinical and experimental neuropsychology to epilepsy and epilepsy surgery since the founding of the International Neuropsychological Society. The five paradigm shifts discussed include: 1) The neurobiology of cognitive disorders in epilepsy – expanding the landscape of syndrome-specific neuropsychological impairment; 2) pathways to comorbidities: bidirectional relationships and their clinical implications; 3) discovering quality of life: The concept, its quantification and applicability; 4) outcomes of epilepsy surgery: challenging conventional wisdom; and 5) Iatrogenic effects of treatment: cognitive and behavioral effects of antiepilepsy drugs. For each area we characterize the status of knowledge, the key developments that have occurred, and how they have altered our understanding of the epilepsies and their management. We conclude with a brief overview of where we believe the field will be headed in the next decade which includes changes in assessment paradigms, moving from characterization of comorbidities to interventions; increasing development of new measures, terminology and classification; increasing interest in neurodegenerative proteins; transitioning from clinical seizure features to modifiable risk factors; and neurobehavioral phenotypes. Overall, enormous progress has been made over the lifespan of the INS with promise of ongoing improvements in understanding of the cognitive and behavioral complications of the epilepsies and their treatment. (JINS, 2017, 23, 791–805)

The past 50 years have been a period of exciting progress in neuropsychological research on traumatic brain injury (TBI). Neuropsychologists and neuropsychological testing have played a critical role in these advances. This study looks back at three major scientific advances in research on TBI that have been critical in pushing the field forward over the past several decades: The advent of modern neuroimaging; the recognition of the importance of non-injury factors in determining recovery from TBI; and the growth of cognitive rehabilitation. Thanks to these advances, we now have a better understanding of the pathophysiology of TBI and how recovery from the injury is also shaped by pre-injury, comorbid, and contextual factors, and we also have increasing evidence that active interventions, including cognitive rehabilitation, can help to promote better outcomes. The study also peers ahead to discern two important directions that seem destined to influence research on TBI over the next 50 years: the development of large, multi-site observational studies and randomized controlled trials, bolstered by international research consortia and the adoption of common data elements; and attempts to translate research into health care and health policy by the application of rigorous methods drawn from implementation science. Future research shaped by these trends should provide critical evidence regarding the outcomes of TBI and its treatment, and should help to disseminate and implement the knowledge gained from research to the betterment of the quality of life of persons with TBI. (JINS, 2017, 23, 806–817)

Although dementia has been described in ancient texts over many centuries (e.g., “Be kind to your father, even if his mind fail him.” – Old Testament: Sirach 3:12), our knowledge of its underlying causes is little more than a century old. Alzheimer published his now famous case study only 110 years ago, and our modern understanding of the disease that bears his name, and its neuropsychological consequences, really only began to accelerate in the 1980s. Since then we have witnessed an explosion of basic and translational research into the causes, characterizations, and possible treatments for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other dementias. We review this lineage of work beginning with Alzheimer’s own writings and drawings, then jump to the modern era beginning in the 1970s and early 1980s and provide a sampling of neuropsychological and other contextual work from each ensuing decade. During the 1980s our field began its foundational studies of profiling the neuropsychological deficits associated with AD and its differentiation from other dementias (e.g., cortical vs. subcortical dementias). The 1990s continued these efforts and began to identify the specific cognitive mechanisms affected by various neuropathologic substrates. The 2000s ushered in a focus on the study of prodromal stages of neurodegenerative disease before the full-blown dementia syndrome (i.e., mild cognitive impairment). The current decade has seen the rise of imaging and other biomarkers to characterize preclinical disease before the development of significant cognitive decline. Finally, we suggest future directions and predictions for dementia-related research and potential therapeutic interventions. (JINS, 2017, 23, 818–831)

The neuropsychological aspects of multiple sclerosis (MS) have evolved over the past three decades. What was once thought to be a rare occurrence, cognitive dysfunction is now viewed as one of the most disabling symptoms of the disease, with devastating effects on patients’ quality of life. This selective review will highlight major innovations and scientific discoveries in the areas of neuropathology, neuroimaging, diagnosis, and treatment that pertain to our understanding of the neuropsychological aspects of MS. Specifically, we focus on the recent discovery that MS produces pathogical lesions of gray matter (GM) that have consequences for cognitive functions. Methods for imaging these GM lesions in MS are discussed along with multimodal imaging studies that integrate structural and functional imaging methods to provide a better understanding of the relationship between cognitive test performance and functional reserve. Innovations in the screening and comprehensive assessment of cognitive disorders are presented along with recent research that examines cognitive dysfunction in pediatric MS. Results of innovative outcome studies in cognitive rehabilitation are discussed. Finally, we highlight trends for potential future innovations over the next decade. (JINS, 2017, 23, 832–842)

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) has been a major cause of family, social, and personal strife for centuries, with current prevalence estimates of 14% for 12-month and 29% lifetime AUD. Neuropsychological testing of selective cognitive, sensory, and motor functions complemented with in vivo brain imaging has enabled tracking the consequences of AUD, which follows a dynamic course of development, maintenance, and recovery or relapse. Controlled studies of alcoholism reviewed herein provide evidence for disruption of selective functions involving executive, visuospatial, mnemonic, emotional, and attentional processes, response inhibition, prosody, and postural stability and brain systems supporting these functions. On a hopeful front, longitudinal study provides convincing evidence for improvement in brain structure and function following sustained sobriety. These discoveries have a strong legacy in the International Neuropsychological Society (INS), starting from its early days when assumptions regarding which brain regions were disrupted relied solely on patterns of functional sparing and impairment deduced from testing. This review is based on the symposium presentation delivered at the 2017 annual North American meeting of the INS in celebration of the 50th anniversary since its institution in 1967. In the spirit of the meeting’s theme, “Binding the Past and Present,” the lecture and this review recognized the past by focusing on early, rigorous neuropsychological studies of alcoholism and their influence on research currently conducted using imaging methods enabling hypothesis testing of brain substrates of observed functional deficits. (JINS, 2017, 23, 843–859)

The present review on HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND) provides a worldwide overview of studies that have investigated the rate and neuropsychological (NP) profile of HAND research since the inception of the 2007 HAND diagnostic nomenclature. In the first part, the review highlights some of the current controversies around HAND prevalence rates. In the second part, the review critically assesses some solutions to move the field forward. In the third part, we present the cross-sectional NP profile in non-Western HIV+ cohorts and in relation to Western cohorts’ findings. The adopted global perspective highlights the successful expansion of NP studies in HIV infection to culturally diverse low- to medium-income countries with high HIV burden. These studies have produced interestingly similar rates of HAND whether patients were naïve or treated and/or virally suppressed compared to the rich income countries where the NP research in NeuroHIV has originated. The perspective also demonstrates that globally, the group which is the most representative of the HIV epidemic, and thus at risk for HAND are persons with chronic HIV infection and survivors of past immunosuppression, while in relative terms, those who have been treated early with long-term viral suppression represent a minority. In the last part, we present a review of the naturalistic longitudinal NP global studies in HIV+cohorts, discuss the role of longitudinal design in solving issues around the question of asymptomatic neurocognitive impairment, and the question of biomarker discovery. Finally, we conclude by calling for greater methods and data harmonization at a global level. (JINS, 2017, 23, 860–869)

An ambition of depression biomarker research is to augment psychometric and cognitive assessment of clinically relevant phenomena with neural measures. Although such applications have been slow to arrive, we observe a steady evolution of the idea and anticipate emerging technologies with some optimism. To highlight critical themes and innovations in depression biomarker research, we take as our point of reference a specific research narrative. We begin with an early model of frontal-limbic dysfunction, which represents a conceptual shift from localized pathology to understanding symptoms as an emergent property of distributed networks. Over the decades, this model accommodates perspectives from neurology, psychiatry, clinical, and cognitive neuroscience, and preserves past insight as more complex methods become available. We also track the expanding mission of brain biomarker research: from the development of diagnostic tools to treatment selection algorithms, measures of neurocognitive functioning and novel targets for neuromodulation. To conclude, we draw from this particular research narrative future directions for biomarker research. We emphasize integration of measurement modalities to describe dynamic change in domain-general networks, and we speculate that a brain-based framework for psychiatric problems may dissolve classical diagnostic and disciplinary boundaries. (JINS, 2017, 23, 870–880)

We review the changing conceptions of schizophrenia over the past 50 years as it became understood as a disorder of brain function and structure in which neurocognitive dysfunction was identified at different illness phases. The centrality of neurocognition has been recognized, especially because neurocognitive deficits are strongly related to social and role functioning in the illness, and as a result neurocognitive measures are used routinely in clinical assessment of individuals with schizophrenia. From the original definitions of the syndrome of schizophrenia in the early 20th century, impaired cognition, especially attention, was considered to be important. Neurocognitive impairments are found in the vast majority of individuals with schizophrenia, and they vary from mild, relatively restricted deficits, to dementia-like syndromes, as early as the first psychotic episode. Neurocognitive deficits are found in the premorbid phase in a substantial minority of pre-teenage youth who later develop schizophrenia, and they apparently worsen by the prodromal, high-risk phase in a majority of those who develop the illness. While there is limited evidence for reversibility of impairments from pharmacological interventions in schizophrenia, promising results have emerged from cognitive remediation studies. Thus, we expect cognitive interventions to play a larger role in schizophrenia in the coming years. Moreover, because youth at risk for schizophrenia can be identified by an emergent high-risk syndrome, earlier interventions might be applied in a pre-emptive way to reduce disability and improve adaptation. The notion of schizophrenia as a developmental neurocognitive disorder with stages opens up a window of possibilities for earlier interventions. (JINS, 2017, 23, 881–892)

Cannabis use has been linked to impairments in neuropsychological functioning across a large and continually expanding body of research. Yet insight into underlying causal relations remains limited due to the historically cross-sectional nature of studies in this area. Recently, however, studies have begun to use more informative design strategies to delineate these associations. The aim of this article is to provide a critical evaluation and review of research that uses longitudinal designs to examine the link between cannabis use and neuropsychological functioning. In summarizing the primary findings across these studies, this review suggests that cannabis use leads to neuropsychological decline. However, across most studies, these associations were modest, were present only for the group with the heaviest cannabis use, and were often attenuated (or no longer significant) after controlling for potential confounding variables. Future studies with neuropsychological data before and after initiation of cannabis use, along with careful measurement and control of “shared risk factors” between cannabis use and poorer neuropsychological outcomes, are needed to better understand who, and under what conditions, is most vulnerable to cannabis-associated neuropsychological decline. (JINS, 2017, 23, 893–902)

Early autism research focused on behavior and cognition. In recent decades, the pace of research has accelerated, and advances in imaging and genetics have allowed the accumulation of biological data. Nevertheless, a coherent picture of the syndrome at either phenotypic or biological level has not emerged. We see two fundamental obstacles to progress in basic understanding of autism. First, the two defining features (impairment in social interactions and communication, and restricted, repetitive behaviors and interests) are historically seen as integrally related. Others hold that these two major traits are fractionable and must be studied independently, casting doubt on autism as a coherent syndrome. Second, despite much recent research on brain structure and function, environmental factors, and genetics/genomics, findings on the biological level have not generally aligned well with those on the phenotypic level. In the first two sections, we explore these challenges, and in the third section, we review approaches that may facilitate progress, such as (1) including in studies all individuals defined by social impairment without regard to repetitive behaviors, (2) forming narrowly defined subtypes by thorough characterization on specific features, both diagnostic and non-diagnostic, (3) focusing on characteristics that may be relatively robust to environmental influence, (4) studying children as early as possible, minimizing environmental influence, and including longitudinal course as an important part of the phenotype, (5) subtyping by environmental risk factors, (6) distinguishing between what participants can do and what they typically do, and (7) aggregating large data sets across sites. (JINS, 2017, 23, 903–915)

The behavior patterns of hyperactivity, impulsivity and inattention that would ultimately become recognized as Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) have been described for centuries. Nevertheless, in the past 35 years, advances in diagnostic methods, identification of biomarkers, and treatments have advanced at an exponential rate. ADHD is now recognized as the most common behavioral disorder of childhood, with risks extending well into adulthood for both males and females, leading to its identification as a significant public health issue. This historical neuropsychological review of ADHD emphasizes scientific highlights in the past 35 years related to ADHD, including the evolution of the diagnosis (from Hyperkinetic Reaction of Childhood to ADHD), influential theories (executive functions, cognitive-energetic, delay aversion), landmark treatment studies (Multimodal Treatment of ADHD [MTA] and Preschool ADHD Treatment Study [PATS]), and advances in brain mapping techniques (anatomic, functional, and resting state magnetic resonance imaging, diffusion tensor imaging). The review concludes by highlighting the challenges of studying and treating a heterogeneous neurodevelopmental disorder like ADHD, with emphasis on associated disorders and conditions (learning disabilities, sluggish cognitive tempo), special populations (girls, preschoolers, adults), and recommendations for scientific inquiry in the next 35 years. Neuropsychologists are well positioned to address the clinical and research challenges of the next generation of studies, especially involving advances in understanding the sexual dimor.phism, full developmental course, and dynamic risks associated with ADHD. (JINS, 2017, 23, 916–929)

Over the past 50 years, research on children and adults with learning disabilities has seen significant advances. Neuropsychological research historically focused on the administration of tests sensitive to brain dysfunction to identify putative neural mechanisms underlying learning disabilities that would serve as the basis for treatment. Led by research on classifying and identifying learning disabilities, four pivotal changes in research paradigms have produced a contemporary scientific, interdisciplinary, and international understanding of these disabilities. These changes are (1) the emergence of cognitive science, (2) the development of quantitative and molecular genetics, (3) the advent of noninvasive structural and functional neuroimaging, and (4) experimental trials of interventions focused on improving academic skills and addressing comorbid conditions. Implications for practice indicate a need to move neuropsychological assessment away from a primary focus on systematic, comprehensive assessment of cognitive skills toward more targeted performance-based assessments of academic achievement, comorbid conditions, and intervention response that lead directly to evidence-based treatment plans. Future research will continue to cross disciplinary boundaries to address questions regarding the interaction of neurobiological and contextual variables, the importance of individual differences in treatment response, and an expanded research base on (a) the most severe cases, (b) older people with LDs, and (c) domains of math problem solving, reading comprehension, and written expression. (JINS, 2017, 23, 930–940)