The performance test section includes tests of:
Visuomotor functioning (eye-hand coordination)*
Precise manipulation of tools according to what eyes see has been a speciality for humans in ancient times. With the introduction of small electronic devices like cell phones, pods, etc., fine-tuned, precise, and rapid movements of the fingers has come inevitable to everybody.
Doing the Figure Drawing Test with a Staedtler Digital Pencil on a Samsung Galaxy Tablet S3 9.7"
Doing the Pen-to-Point Test with a Staedtler Digital Pencil on a Samsung Galaxy Tablet S3 9.7"
The Cognitive Function Scanner Mobile Performance Test Suite comprises two tests of visuomotor functioning: the Figure Drawing Test for continuous motion and the Pen-to-Point Test for discrete motion. Both tests are developed especially for the cognitive Function Scanner system combining the experience from various drawing tests and pin-and-peg tests. The two tests are taken separately for each body half/brain hemisphere beginning each test with the dominant hand.
The test layouts are displayed on the tablet. The tablet enters pen-only mode that allows the client to rest his or her hand on the surface during the tests. Width of pen tip is 0.7 mm.
In the Figure Drawing Test the client has to trace a curved line with a digital pinpoint pen (or as in the photo a digital pencil) without ink, while in the Pen-to-Point Test the client has to point with the tip of the pen (or digital pencil) as accurately as possible into the centres of small crosses distributed along a straight line in the centre of the screen (the latter being a simulation of a pin-to-hole test). The parameters of each of the two tests are:
Psychometric parameters for each hand:
In addition to these psychometric parametres a complete reproduction of the client's drawing is generated to elucidate an eventual neglect problem or other qualiatative signs of dysfunction.
The Spatial capacity is essential in relation to navigation, driving, reading and writing, etc., etc. Tests of visuospatial functioning come in many variants, some two-dimensional, others three-dimensional. In the Cognitive Functional Scanner systems we have chosen the Parallelogram Test, i.e., a two-dimensional type, because it fits well with the tablet screen.
The Parallelogram Test consists of 10 sets of each three parallelograms, all displayed on
the tablet at the same time. The three parallelograms in each set have a thick base line,
two of them being arranged
nose-to-nose on the same baseline that always points
towards the client. The orientation of the base line of the third and separate
parallelogram in each set differs from those on the shared baseline. It may point in any
direction. The task for the client is to imagine that he or she rotates the separate
parallelogram of each set so that its baseline becomes congruent with that of the two
parallelograms sharing the baseline. Having reached that far, the client must point out the
corner of the congruent parallelogram on the common baseline that corresponds to the dotted
corner of the
The tablet enters pen-only mode allowing the client to rest his or her hand on the surface during the test. The digital pen (or pencil) is used for the pointing.
The psychometric parameters of the test are:
In addition to these psychometric parametres a complete response process chart is drawn showing the exact response positions and latencies for each of the single subtasks allowing for qualitative evaluation.
Visual attention and vigilance*
The capability of keeping sustained attention (to maintain a certain level of arousal) is essential for survival. In the Cognitive Function Scanner systems the testing of visual attention and vigilance is done using the Bourdon-Wiersma Test modified for use on a tablet computer. The Bourdon-Wiersma Test was chosen because its culture-free graphic objects.
The Bourdon-Wiersma Test used in the Cognitive Function Scanner systems consists of
37 rows of 25 dot-groups of three, four, or five dots each. The dot-groups are rotated
differently calling for the client's spatial capacity. Each row includes eight
three-dot-groups, nine four-dot-groups, and eight five-dot-groups distributed at random.
The client's task is to search the rows marking all four-dot groups with the pinpoint pen
(or digital pencil) leaving a virtual
ink mark across every four-dot-group on the
ink marking is used to provide visual feedback and prevent confusion.
Because attention is closely linked to time, time is measured for each row so that
variation in performance time can be used as a measure of vigilance. In addition to time
the number of errors is recorded for each row. The performance of the first and the last
row is excluded from the calculations of the overall performance partly because it cannot
be defined precisely when a client begins searching, and partly because the test should
terminate even if the last dot-groups in the lowest row are not detected/marked.
The psychometric parameters of the test are:
In addition to these psychometric parametres a complete chart of the client's errors (unmarked or incorrectly marked dot groups) is generated to elucidate an eventual neglect problem or other deficits that need a qualitative approach.
The Continuous Graphics Test is a test of simulated handwriting, thus calling for visuospatial capacity, visuomotor capacity, working memory, and capacity to turn a mental image into complex coordinated action. The Continuous Graphics Test was originally developed by Andersen (1978) to detect subclinical fluctuations in consciousness in epileptics, in whom it was expected that interruption in the neural and psychological processes could be responsible for the lack of continuity during the drawing of the patterns. Although the test was developed for use within a certain group of patients, decreased performance is not related to any specific cerebral disorder.
Doing the Continuous Graphics Test using a Staedtler Digital Pencil on a Samsung Galaxy Tablet model S3 9.7" (pattern not shown).
The Continuous Graphics Test used in the Cognitive Function Scanner systems includes three rhythmically shifting graphic patterns. Due to the limited amount of space available on a tablet computer the response line is broken into two parts in the mobile version (in the PC-version the response line is one unbroken string of squares). The client's task is to copy each pattern on the rows of squares (56 squares in total) using the pinpoint pen (or digital pencil) leaving no visual trace and thus delivering no feedback to the client. He or she will have the model available only while copying the first repetitions of the patterns on the middle line. The remaining part of the pattern must be filled in from memory. Because of lack of visual feedback from the "invisible" drawing the client has to remember the pattern and to be aware of how far he or she has drawn. The performance is evaluated automatically by means of an artificial neural network especially trained for this task.
The psychometric parameters of the test are:
In addition to these psychometric parametres complete reproductions of the client's drawings are made added with information on latencies and error positions allowing for qualitative evaluation.
Auditory reaction time and vigilance
The Reaction-time Test in the Cognitive Function Scanner system is a test of continuous simple reaction-time and vigilance over a period of approximately 7 minutes. It is composed of a series of audible stimuli, each as a constant tone at 440 Hz. The tones are randomly distributed with two to six second intervals, and presented to the client via the built-in loudspeaker of the device.
The client responds to the test by swiping the
corner of the rim of the device with the index finger. When the app
hears a swipe
the clock is read and the tone stops. Using audible response sensing instead of screen
touching the slowness of the touchscreen technology is eliminated that otherwise would
delay and invalidate the measurement. A total of 78 stimuli are given, of which the first
three are omitted from the analysis. They are present to allow the subject a chance to
familiarize with the stimuli and for the psychologist to check if the client complies with
Reaction Time Test - response process chart (printable like the response process charts produced by any test in the Cognitive Function Scanner Mobile app).
The psychometric parameters of the test are:
The learning and memory section includes tests of:
Memory for faces - Face Recognition Test
The Face Recognition Test consists of three series of portraits presented on the screen of your mobile device. The portraits are ordinary male citizens not known to the public. The first series is composed of nine portraits, which the subject is asked to look at carefully so that he will be able to point them out when he sees them among 25 other portraits. Every stimulus picture is shown for five seconds. The second series consists of 34 portraits, among which are the nine stimulus portraits. This series is run immediately after the first series and the subject is asked to respond "yes" or "no" to every portrait presented. The subject gives his responses at his own pace via touch buttons on the smartphone or tablet. Once a response has been given, correction is not possible. The test also includes a retention section to be taken approximately 1 hour after the the learning section.
Responding to the Face Recognition Test on a smartphone
Selection and sequence of the stimulus pictures are made according to a random procedure each time the test is initialized in order to reduce the test re-test effect. The parameters of the test are:
The second test in the system is the Word Recognition Test offering 20 different languages independently of the language used for the entire examination. The languages available are Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Faroese, Finnish, French, German, Greenlandic, Icelandic, Italian, Norwegian, Polish, Portuguese, Russian, Sami, Serbo-Croatian, Spanish, Swedish, and Turkish.
The Word Recognition Test is technically parallel to the Face Recognition Test, thus allowing comparison of the functioning of the two brain hemispheres. The test consists of three series of adjectives presented on the computer screen. The first series is composed of nine words, which the subject is asked to look at carefully so that he will be able to point them out when he sees them among 25 other words. Every stimulus word is shown for five seconds. The second series consists of 34 words, among which are the nine stimulus words. This series is run immediately after the first series and the subject is asked to respond "yes" or "no" to every word presented. Once a response has been given, correction is not possible. The test also includes a retention section to be taken approximately 1 hour after the the learning section.
The following two photos show example screens of the Word Recognition Test on a smartphone. The first photo shows the screen from which the language is chosen for the words to be learned. The second photo shows the response screen of the immediate recognition section of the Word Recognition Test.
Flags guiding the choise of language independently of the language of the entire test session (client's mother tongue is recommended for the test)
Responding to the Word Recognition Test on a smartphone
As with the Face Recognition Test selection and sequence of the stimulus words are made according to a random procedure each time the test is initialized in order to reduce the test re-test effect. The parameters of the test are:
In the Number Learning Test the subject is asked to remember eight two-digit numbers, which are randomly generated by the smartphone or tablet in the interval 21-99. The numbers are shown on the screen at intervals of three seconds. When the numbers are presented, the subject is asked to read them aloud concurrently with their appearance on the screen. When all eight numbers have been shown, the subject is asked to respond. He may enter the numbers in any order he likes by means of the numeric keyboard appearing to the right or to the left of the screen according to information on handedness entered at an earlier point of the examination. If some numbers are missing, only the missing numbers are shown to him again. After a few seconds, when the screen is cleared, the subject has to enter all eight numbers again. If some of the numbers are still missing, these are shown again. The test continues with this selective reminding until the subject has learned all eight numbers, or to the maximum of 10 trials.
Responding to the Number Learning Test on a smartphone. The keyboard is automatically left-alligned in case of left-handed clients
Summary result page following completion of the learning section of the Number Learning Test on a smartphone
The number series is automatically changed each time the test is initialized.
Like the three former tests the Number Learning Test includes a section of retention in which the subject is asked to enter the numbers he remembers. This entry is made approximately 1 hour after the learning process is completed. The parameters of the test are:
The Sound Recognition Test is a new test to the Cognitive Function Scanner system. It is made over the same model as the Face Recognition Test and the Word Recognition Test but offers environmental sounds as objects. The new test is included to offer a learning and memory test suitable for the assessment of learning and memory of blind people. All sounds are authentic recordings from actual life situations.
The test consists of three series of sounds presented via the smartphone's loudspeaker or headphone set. The first series is composed of nine sounds, which the subject is asked to carefully listen to so that he will be able to point them out when he is presented for them among 25 other sounds. Every sound stimulus is presented for five seconds with a pause of two seconds so that the client can distinguish between the presented sounds. The second series consists of 34 sounds, among which are the nine stimulus sounds. This series is run immediately after the first series and the subject is asked to respond "yes" or "no" to every sound presented via two touch buttons located in the lower corners of the smartphone or tablet making tactile navigation possible via the rim of the smartphone or tablet. Once a response has been given, correction is not possible. The test also includes a retention section to be taken approximately 1 hour after the the learning section.
Summary result page following completion of the retention section of the Sound Recognition Test on a smartphone
As with the Face Recognition Test and the Word Recognition Test selection and sequence of the stimulus sounds are made according to a random procedure each time the test is initialized in order to reduce the test re-test effect. The parameters of the test are:
The Cognitive Function Scanner Mobile app runs on smartphones and tablets driven by the Android operating system, for example devices produced by Samsung. The app has shown to work on Android releases from version 6.0. The current version of Cognitive Function Scanner Mobile, 4.01.04, takes up approximately 30 MB of the device memory.
Please note that the Figure Drawing Test, the Pen-to-Point Test, the Parallelogram Test, The Bourdon-Wiersma Test and the Continuous Graphics Test all demand a tablet featuring a sharp-tipped pen compatible with Samsung's S-Pens. These pencil tests appear equal in size independently of the screen resolution of your test device. Currently Samsung's Galaxy Tablet S3 (9.7") with S-Pen, Samsung's Tablet S4 (10.5") with S Pen and Samsung's Galaxy Tablet S6 (10.5") with S Pen are available from most computer stores.
Instead of using the S-Pen that comes along with select Samsung tablets you may want to obtain a genuine pencil like the Staedtler Noris Digital Pencil (EAN 4007817035368) designed for Samsung. Neither Samsung's S-Pen nor the Staedtler Noris Digital Pencil need to be charged, i.e., there is no risk of running out of power during an examination session.
The Cognitive Function Scanner Mobile app is delivered with reference values obtained by the PC-version. The reference values covering the age span from 25 to 75 years are collected via large-scale investigations of representative samples of the Danish general population, N=1,026 and N=711, respectively.
Download and installation
The Cognitive Function Scanner Mobile app is available on Google Play in the Nordic countries, i.e., Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. Please note that the app is double locked to prevent it from being used by layman. Only neuropsychologists and clinical psychologists are entitled to register by the developer and obtain a user license and a validation code to unlock the app.
Please note that the pencil tests only run on a Samsung Tablet S3 with S Pen, Samsung Tablet S4 with S Pen, or a tablet completely compatible with one of those tablets.
The prototype to the Cognitive Function Scanner system was developed back in 1982 in the labs of the Danish National Institute of Occupational Health. The purpose was to establish an efficient, standardized, and reliable method for assessment of cognitive status of the general public.
The prototype was built over a Tektronix 4052 desktop computer and a Tektronix 4956 graphics tablet. Both instruments had undergone technical modifications. As computer screens those days were monochrome a slide projector controlled by the computer was used for the display of portrait photos in a test of face recognition.
The Cognitive Function Scanner was, among other things, used in two large-scale longitudinal studies (1982-83 and 1993-94) of cognitive performance of the general Danish population. The results from these two studies were published in two supplement volumes to the scientific journal Acta Neurologica Scandinavica in 1990 and 1997.
At these occasions an extensive statistical material was collected across several age groups, gender and schooling (vocational training) and a set of norms was established for 45 psychometric parameters covering learning and memory, psychomotor functioning, visuospatial functioning, attention, perception, and vigilance. The norms cover the age span from 25 to 75 years.
The Cognitive Function Scanner prototype. Glostrup Hospital, Denmark 1982
After the Cognitive Function Scanner came commercially available in 1988 it has mostly been used in traditional clinical work within neurology and psychiatry, i.e. neuropsychological assessment with a diagnostic purpose the users being university hospitals and district hospitals all over the Nordic countries. For decades the technical solutions of the system together with the unparalleled set of norms probably made the Cognitive Function Scanner to the most distinctive system of its kind.
The first commercially available Cognitive Function Scanner for the PC, 1989
In addition to learning and memory tests the prototype and all releases of the Cognitive Function Scanner for the PC-environment included tests of visuomotor functioning, visuospatial functioning, attention, vigilance and concentration to ensure a high degree of comprehensiveness and ecological validity of the battery. These tests were done by means of very accurate graphics tablets featuring pens resembling ordinary ballpoint pens.
With the introduction of the Cognitive Function Scanner release 3-1 in 1996 a detailed time-linked continuous recording of the response process was included. In complex clinical cases these qualitative data can act as a valuable support for the interpretation of psychometric results. In addition to cognitive functioning and style the qualitative data elucidates and documents personality traits related to collaboration during the examination.
Especially for the testing of reaction-time in relation to acquisition or renewal of a driving license, a stand-alone version of the continuous Reaction Time Test was introduced by the late 1990s and marketed as the RT-Profile Test.
With introduction of mobile computers, tablets, and smartphones, etc. demands to portable and highly efficient neuropsychological test systems has grown. Today the Cognitive Function Scanner for the PC is replaced by the Cognitive Function Scanner Mobile apps for smartphones and tablets. Like the original system, the mobile versions are comprehensive state-of-the-art assessment tools including tests of learning and memory, true pencil tests for eye-hand coordination, visuospatial functioning, perception, attention, and vigilance.
Cognitive Function Scanner Mobile is an application for use exclusively by professional neuropsychologists. To run the application the user needs a user license key and a validation key from the developer. License keys and validation keys are supplied only to neuropsychologists who can prove their qualifications.
The purpose of the Cognitive Function Scanner Mobile application is to provide a standardised and reliable instrument for testing neuropsychological functioning of humans, i.e., to provide indicators of attention, memory, perception, visuomotor functioning and visuospatial functioning. To do so the Cognitive Function Scanner Mobile application collects data during the testing and stores these data into files on the test device.
During the test of reaction time the microphone of the device is active. The microphone is used to detect the onset of sound stimuli and of client responses, respectively. The reason for using sound as 'stimulus-response-carrier' is that touchscreen technology is too slow and imprecise in relation to normal human reaction time. No sound information received by the device is stored by the application, and because the app doesn't have permission for Internet access during the testing, no sound information leaves the test device.
The examining neuropsychologist has the full and entire responsibility at all times for all data entered or otherwise recorded by the application. No information is automatically transmitted by the application to any external party, neither to the developer of the application nor to anybody else.
Q: In your photos on this website you use what looks like a wooden pencil. Can an ordinary pencil be used on the tablet?
A: No, an ordinary pencil cannot be used on the tablet, but the German pencil producer Staedtler makes a digital pencil that can replace the S Pen. It has EAN number 4007817035368. It is such a pencil you see in the photos.
Q: Is it possible to obtain a Samsung S Pen and use it on a tablet that did not include the S Pen from the beginning?
A: No, it is not possible, because Samsung use a different technology (magnetic resonance) for their tablets with S Pen than with their 'ordinary' tablets (capacitive technology).
Q: When a person draws or writes that person usually rests a hand on the item on which the drawing or writing takes place. Is it possible to rest one's finger or hand on the tablet screen while doing the pen-based tests?
A: Yes, it is possible to rest fingers/hands on the screen during the pen-based tests. The tablet is in pen mode and is immune to finger/hand touching.
Q: How does the Cognitive Function Scanner comply with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)?
A: Cognitive Function Scanner is not an online system. The tablet or smartphone used for the testing must be disconnected from any network during the entire examination. No data are sent anywhere at any time unless the user intentionally transmits the examination protocol to a permanent storage system or the like. The user is urged to delete completed examination protocols from the test device. Contrary to online digital psychological test systems all data obtained by Cognitive Function Scanner remain the sole property of the psychologist, who has taken the tests, and consequently, who is fully responsible that the EU GDPR is followed.
Andersen R. Cognitive changes after amygdalotomy. Neuropsychologia 1978; 16: 439-451.
Anderson KE, Perera GM, Hilton J, Zubin N, Paz RD, Stern Y. Functional magnetic resonance imaging study of word recognition in normal elders. Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmalogy & Biological Psychiatry 2002; 26: 647-50.
Baddeley AD, Lewis V, Vallar G. Exploring the articulatory loop. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1984; 36: 233-252.
Bartolomeo P, de Schotten MT, Chica AB. Brain networks of visuospatial attention and their disruption in visual neglect. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2012; 6: 110.
Behrmann M, Plaut DC. Bilateral hemispheric processing of words and faces: Evidence from word impairments in prosopagnosia and face impairments in pure alexia. Cerebral Cortex 2014; 24: 1102-1118.
Bourdon B., Wiersma ED, (1910) The Bourdon Wiersma Test. CoTAN: 2000 I: 532 (28.1); 1992 (28.1).
Brun B, Knudsen P. Psykologisk undersøgelsesmetodik - En basisbog. 2. reviderede udgave, København 2006; Dansk Psykologisk Forlag.[Psychological Assessment Methodology, 2nd revised edition. Copenhagen 2006: Danish Psychological Publishers].
Buschke H, Fuld PA. Evaluating storage, retention, and retrieval in disordered memory and learning. Neurology 1974: 24; 1019-1025.
Colette F, Van der Linden M. Review brain imaging of the central executive component of working memory. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 2002; 26: 105-25.
Degerman A, Rinne T, Salmi J, Salonen O, Alho K. Selective attention to sound location or pitch studied with fMRI. Brain Research 2006; 1077: 123-34.
Dehaene S, Piazza M, Pinel P, Cohen L. Three parietal circuits for number processing. Cognitive Neuropsychology 2003; 20: 487-506.
Elsass P. Continous reaction times in cerebral dysfunction. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica 1986; 73: 225-46.
Engel LR, Frum C, Puce A, Walker NA, Lewis JW. Different categories of living and non-living sound-sources activate distinct cortical networks. Neuroimage. 2009; 47: 1778-91.
Gerlach C, Marstrand L, Starrfelt R, Gade A. No strong evidence for lateralisation of word reading and face recognition deficits following posterior brain injury. Journal of Cognitive Psychology 2014; 26: 550-558.
Gowen E, Miall RC. Differentiation between external and internal cuing: An fMRI study comparing tracing with drawing. NeuroImage 2007; 36: 396-410.
Grabowska A, Gut M, Binder M, Forsberg L, Rymarczyk K, Urbanik A. Switching handedness: fMRI study of hand motor control in right-handers, left-handers and converted left-handers. Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis 2012; 72: 439-51.
Grewel F. The Bourdon-Wiersma Test. Folia Psychiatrica, Neurologica et Neurochirurgica Neerlandica. 1953; 56: 694-703.
Halari R, Sharma T, Hines M, Andrew C, Simmons A, Kumari V. Comparable fMRI activity with differential behavioural performance on mental rotation and overt verbal fluency tasks in healthy men and women. Experimental Brain Research 2006; 169: 1-14.
Hall D, Haggard MP, Akeroyd MA, Summerfield AQ, Palmer AR, Elliot MR, Bowtell RW. Modulation and task effects in auditory processing measured using fMRI. Human Brain Mapping 2000; 10: 107-19.
Hänninen H, Lindström K. Behavioral test battery for toxicopsychological studies. Reviews 1. Helsinki: Institute of Occupational Health, 1979.
Harrington GS, Farias D, Davis CH, Buonocore MH. Comparison of the neural basis for imagined writing and drawing. Human Brain Mapping 2007; 28: 450-59.
Haxby JV, Hoffman EA, Gobbini MI. The distributed human neural system for face perception, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2000; 4: 223-33.
Jahanshahi M, Dirnberger G, Fuller R, Frith CD. The role of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in random number generation: a study with positron emission tomography. Neuroimage 2000; 12: 713-25.
Johnson SC, Saykin AJ, Flashman LA, McAllister TW, Sparling MB. Brain activation of fMRI and verbal memory ability: functional neuroanatomic correlates of CVLT performance. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society 2001; 7: 55-62.
Jueptner J, Jueptner M, Jenkins IH, Brooks DJ, Frackowiak RSJ, Passingham RE. The sensory guidance of movement: a comparison of the cerebellum and basal ganglia. Experimental Brain Research 1996; 112: 462-74.
Kanwisher N, McDermott J, Chun MM. The fusiform area; A module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception. Journal of Neuroscience 1997; 17: 4302-11.
Karimpoor M, Churchill N, Tam F, Fischer C, Schweizer T, Graham S. Neural correlates of handwriting. Conference poster at Organization for Human Brain Mapping, Vancouver 2017: June 28-29.
Kim JJ, Andreasen NC, O’Leary DS, Wiser AK, Boles Ponto LL, Watkins GL, Hichwa RD. Direct comparison of the neural substrates of recognition memory for words and faces. Brain 1999; 122: 1069-83.
Kleinschmidt A, Cohen L. The neural bases of prosopagnosia and pure alexia: recent insights from functional neuroimaging, Current Opinion in Neurology 2006; 19: 386-91.
Knops A, Nuerk H-C, Fimm B, Vohn R, Willmes K. A special role for numbers in working memory? An fMRI study. Neuroimage 2006; 29: 1-14.
Lamm C, Windischberger C, Moser E, Bauer H. The functional role of dorso-lateral premotor cortex during mental rotation: An event-related fMRI study separating cognitive processing steps using a novel task paradigm. Neuroimage 2007; 36: 1374-86.
Langner R, Eickhoff SB. Sustaining attention to simple tasks: A meta-analytic review of the neural mechanisms of vigilant attention. Psychological Bulletin 2013; 139: 870-900.
Laursen P, Eskelinen L. Information process recording and psychometrics in computer-aided neuropsychological assessment. The 4th Nordic Neuropsychology Symposium, Espoo, Finland, August 1991.
Laursen P, Eskelinen L. The Cognitive Function Scanner: A computer-aided psychological examination system for neuropsychological evaluation. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 1989; 3: 365.
Laursen P, Eskelinen L. The Cognitive Function Scanner: A computer-aided psychological examination system for neurobehavioral evaluation. In Johnson BL, ed. Advances in Neurobehavioral Toxicology: Applications in Environmental and Occupational Health. Chelsea: Lewis Publishers Inc., 1990.
Laursen P. A computer-aided technique for testing cognitive functions validated on a sample of Danes 30 to 60 years of age. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica 1990; vol. 82, suppl. 131.
Laursen P. The impact of aging on cognitive functions. An 11 year follow-up study of four age cohorts, Acta Neurologica Scandinavica 1997; vol. 96, suppl. 172.
Lewis JW, Wightman FL, Brefczynski JA, Phinney RE, Binder JR, DeYoe EA. Human brain regions involved in recognizing environmental sounds. Cerebral Cortex 2004; 14: 1008-21.
Lezak MD. IQ: R.I.P. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 1988; 10: 351-361.
Maeder PP, Meuli RA, Adriani M, Bellmann A, Fornari E, Thiran JP, Pittet A, Clarke S. Distinct pathways involved in sound recognition and localization: a human fMRI study. Neuroimage 2001; 14: 802-16.
Makuuchi M, Kaminaga T, Sugishita M. Both parietal lobs are involved in drawing: a functional MRI study and implications for constructional apraxia. Brain Research. Cognitive Brain Research 2003; 16: 338-47.
Marcell MM1, Borella D, Greene M, Kerr E, Rogers S. Confrontation naming of environmental sounds Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 2000; 22: 830-64.
Marshall L, Brandt JF. The relationship between loudness and reaction time in normal hearing listeners. Acta Otolaryngology 1980; 90: 244-249.
McCandliss BD, Cohen L, Dehaene S. The visual word form area: expertise for reading in the fusiform gyrus, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2003; 7: 293-99.
Miall RC, Reckess GZ, Imamizu H. The cerebellum coordinates eye and hand tracking movements. Nature Neuroscience 2001; 4: 638-44.
Milberg WP, Hebben N, Kaplan E. The Boston Process Approach to Neuropsychological Assessment. In Grant I, Adams KM eds. Neuropsychological Assessment of Neuropsychiatric Disorders. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, pp. 65-86.
Mort DJ, Malhotra P, Mannan SK, Rorden C, Pambakian A, Kennard C, Husain M. The anatomy of visual neglect. Brain 2003; 126: 1986-97.
Nichols EA, Kao YC, Verfaellie M, Gabrieli JDE. Working memory and long-term memory for faces: Evidence from fMRI and global amnesia for involvement of the medial temporal lobes. Hippocampus 2006; 16: 604-16.
Ogawa K, Inui T, Sugio T. Separating brain regions involved in internally guided and visual feedback control of moving effectors: An event-related fMRI study. Neuroimage 2006; 32: 1760-70.
Ogawa K, Inui T. The role of the posterior parietal cortex in drawing by copying. Neuropsychologia 2009; 47: 1013-22.
Ogawa K, Nagai C, Inui T. Brain mechanisms of visuomotor transformation based on deficits in tracing and copying. Japanese Psychological Research 2010; 52: 91-106.
Park J, Hebrank A, Polk TA, Park DC. Neural dissociation of number from letter recognition and its relationship to parietal numerical processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2012; 24: 39-50.
Petersen SE, Corbetta M, Miezin FM, Schulman GL. PET studies of parietal involvement in spatial attention: Comparison of different task types. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 1994; 48: 319-338.
Petit L, Simon G, Jolio M, Andersson F, Bertin T, Zago L, Mellet E, Tzourio-Mazoyer N. Right hemisphere dominance for auditory attention and its modulation by eye position: An event related fMRI study. Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience 2007; 25: 211-25.
Planton S, Jucla M, Roux FE, Demonet J. The “handwriting brain”: A meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies of motor versus orthographic processes. Cortex 2013; 49: 2772-87.
Planton S, Longcamp M, Péran P, Démonet J-F, Jucla M. How specialized are writing-specific brain regions? An fMRI study of writing, drawing and oral spelling. Cortex 2017; 88: 66-80.
Ratcliff R. Methods for dealing with reaction time outliers. Psychological Bulletin 1993; 114: 510-32.
Rajimehr R, Young JC, Tootell RBH. An anterior temporal face patch in human cortex, predicted by macaque maps. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2009; 106: doi: 10.1073 pnas. 0807304106.
Richter W, Somorjai R, Summers R, Jarmasz M, Menon RS, Gati JS, Georgopoulos P, Tegeler C, Ugurbil K, Kim S-G. Motor area activity during mental rotation studied by time-resolved single-trial fMRI. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2000; 12: 310-20.
Rizzolatti G, Luppino G, Matelli M. The organization of the cortical motor system: new concepts. Electroencephalographic Clinical Neurophysiology 1998; 106: 283-96.
Roux FE, Dufor O, Giussani C, Wamain Y, Draper L, Longcamp M, Démonet JF. The graphemic/motor frontal area Exner’s area revisited. Annals of Neurology 2009; 66: 537-45.
Salmi J, Rinne T, Koistinen S,Salonen O, Alho K. Brain networks of bottom-up triggered and top-down controlled shofting of auditory attention. Brain Research 2009; 1286: 155-64.
Sams T, Laursen P, Eskelinen L. Response classification in psychological testing using a neural network. International Journal of Neural Systems 1994; 5: 253-56.
Schaer K, Jahn G, Lotze M. fMRI-activation during drawing a naturalistic or sketchy portrait. Behavioural Brain Research 2012; 233: 209-16.
Segal E, Petrides M. The anterior superior parietal lobule and its interactions with language and motor areas during writing. European Journal of Neuroscience 2012; 35: 309-22.
Sturm W, Willmes K. On the functional neuroanatomy of intrinsic and phasic alertness. Neuroimage 2001; 14: S76-84.
Thimm M, Fink GR. Kuuml;st J, Karbe H, Sturm W. Impact of alertness on spatial neglect: A behavioural and fMRI study. Neuropsychologia 2006; 44: 1230-1246.
Tomasino B, Canderan C, Marin D, Maieron M, Gremese M, D’Agostini S, Fabbro F, Skrap M. Identifying environmental sounds: a multimodal mapping study. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2015; 9: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00567.
Voisin J, Bidet-Caulet A, Bertrand O, Fonlupt P. Listening in silence activated auditory areas: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Journal of Neuroscience 2006; 26: 273-78.
Wang TY, Huang HC, Huang HS. Design and implementation of cancellation tasks for visual search strategies and visual attention in school children. Computers and Education 2006; 47: 1-16.
Warrington EK, Taylor AM. Immediate memory for faces: long- or short-term memory? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1973: 25; 316-322.
Western SL, Long CJ. Relationship between reaction time and neurophysiological test performance. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 1996; 11: 557-571.
Yuan Y, Brown S. The neural basis of mark making: a functional MRI study of drawing. PLOS One 2014; 9: 0108628.
Zacks JM. Neuroimaging studies of mental rotation: A meta-analysis and review. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2008; 20: 1-19.