Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T12:10:25.136Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Personality Changes in Relation to Psychiatric Status following Orbital Cortex Undercutting

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 January 2018

Freda Levinson  and
Victor Meyer
Freda Levinson
Affiliation:
National Bureau for Co-operation in Child Care
Victor Meyer
Affiliation:
Academic Department of Psychiatry, Middlesex Hospital Medical School
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The aim of this study was to evaluate changes in selected personality variables following a form of leucotomy described as orbital undercutting (Knight, 1959) and to relate these findings to clinical observations.

Type
Research Article
Information
The British Journal of Psychiatry , Volume 111 , Issue 472 , March 1965 , pp. 207 - 218
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1965 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bartholomew, A. A., and Marley, E. (1959). “The temporal reliability of the Maudsley Personality Inventory”. J. Ment. Sci., 105, 238–240.Google Scholar
Crown, S. (1951). “Psychological change following pre-frontal leucotomy: a review.” Ibid., 97, 49–83.Google Scholar
Crown, S. (1953). “Psychological changes following operations on the frontal lobes.” J. cons. Psychol., 17, 92–99.Google Scholar
Elithorn, A., Glithero, E., and Slater, E. (1958). “Leucotomy for pain.” J. Neurol. Psychiat., 21, 249.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1957). Dynamics of Anxiety and Hysteria. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1959). The Manual of the Maudsley Personality Inventory. University of London Press Ltd.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1960). Handbook of Abnormal Psychology. London: Pitman.Google Scholar
Freeman, W., and Watts, J. (1942). Psychosurgery. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas.Google Scholar
Freeman, W., and Watts, J. (1944). “Psychosurgery: in evaluation of 200 cases over 7 years” J. Ment. Sci., 90, 532–537.Google Scholar
Greenblatt, M., and Solomon, H. C. (1953). Frontal Lobe and Schizophrenia. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Hebb, D. O. (1945). “Man's frontal lobes: a critical review.” Arch. Neurol. Psychiat., 54, 10–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, A. (1958). “The Maudsley Personality Inventory.” Acta psychol. (Amst.), 14, 314–325.Google Scholar
Klebanoff, S. G., Singer, J. L., and Wilensky, J. (1954). “Psychological consequences of brain lesions and ablations.” Psychol. Bull., 51, 1–41.Google Scholar
Knight, G. C. (1959). “Restricted orbital cortex undercutting in the treatment of psychosis and psychoneurosis”, in British Surgical Practice. Lordor: Butterworth & Co.Google Scholar
Knowles, J. B. (1960). “The temporal stability of M.P.I. scores in normal and psychiatric populations.” J. cons. Psychol., 24, 278.Google Scholar
Kral, V. A., and Elvidge, A. R. (1955). “Four years' experience with pre-frontal leucotomy.” Amer. J. Psychiat., 112, 375–381.Google Scholar
Matarazzo, J. D., Guze, S. B., and Matarazzo, R. G. (1955). “An approach to the validity of the Taylor Anxiety Scale: scores of medical and psychiatric patients.” J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 51, 276–280.Google Scholar
Masserman, J. H., and Pechtel, C. (1956). “How brain lesions affect normal and neurotic behaviour—an experimental approach.” Amer. J. Psychiat., 112, 865–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maxwell, A. E. (1960). “Obtaining factor scores on the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale.” J. Ment. Sci., 106, 1060.Google Scholar
Mettler, F. A. (1949). Columbia-Greystone Associates. Selective Partial Ablation of the Frontal Cortex . New York: Hoeber Inc. and Landis (1952). Columbia-Greystone Associates 2nd Group. Psycho-surgical Problems. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd.Google Scholar
Meyer, V. (1960). “Psychological effects of brain damage”, in Handbook of Abnormal Psychology (ed. H. J. Eysenck). London: Pitman.Google Scholar
Ødegard, Ø. (1949). “Indications from psychological investigations and results.” Acta psychiatrica et neurologica. Supplementum 60.Google Scholar
Petrie, A. (1952). Personality and the Frontal Lobe. New York: Blakiston.Google Scholar
Petrie, A. (1958). “Effects of chlorpromazine and of brain lesions on personality”, in Psychopharmacology (ed. H. D. Penner). New York: Harper (Hoeber).Google Scholar
Porteus, S. D., and Peters, H. (1947). “Maze test validation and psychosurgery.” Genet. Psychol. Monogr., 36, 3–86.Google Scholar
Porteus, S. D., and Peters, H. (1952). The Porteus Maze Manual. London: Harrap & Co.Google Scholar
Rylander, G. (1948). “Personality before and after frontal lobotomy.” Proc. Ass. Ret. nerv. Pis. Frontal Lobes 27. 691 and 705 (ed. Williams, and Wilkins, ).Google Scholar
Baltimore. Sheer, D. (1956). Studies in Topectomy. Ch. VI. New York: Grune and Stratton.Google Scholar
Smith, A. (1960). “Changes in Porteus Maze scores of brain-operated schizophrenics after an 8-year interval.” J. Ment. Sci., 106, 967–978.Google Scholar
Sykes, M. K., and Tredgold, R. F. (1964). “Restricted orbital-undercutting: a study of its effects on 350 patients over the ten years 1951–60.” Brit. J. Psychiat., 110, 609.Google Scholar
Taylor, J. A. (1953). “A personality scale of manifest anxiety.” J. abnorm, soc. Psychol., 48, 285–290.Google Scholar
Tizard, B. (1958). “The psychological effects of fronta lesion.” Separatum. Acta psychiatrica et neurologica Scandanavica, 39, 2.Google Scholar
Tow, P. McD. (1955). Personality Change following Frontal Leucotomy. Oxford: Medical Publications.Google Scholar
Vidor, M. (1951). “Personality changes following pre-frontal leucotomy as reflected by the M.M.P.I. and the results of psychometric testing.” J. Ment. Sci., 97, 159–173.Google Scholar
Willett, R. A. (1960). “The effects of psychosurgical procedures on behaviour”, in Handbook of Abnormal Psychology (ed. H. J. Eysenck). London: Pitman.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.