This article presents some helpful suggestions on how researchers can write an interesting and convincing paper based on case-based research. A single case study, unless the subject is extremely interesting, will be hard to make interesting enough to hold readers' attention. Case-based research is often criticized for having a biased sample of cases. The main object of case studies should be to provoke thought and new ideas, rather than to poke holes in existing theories. Theories are only simplifications of a much more complex reality.

Persuasion with case studies

Many current neurophysiological, psychophysical, and psychological approaches to vision rest on the idea that when we see, the brain produces an internal representation of the world. The activation of this internal representation is assumed to give rise to the experience of seeing. The problem with this kind of approach is that it leaves unexplained how the existence of such a detailed internal representation might produce visual consciousness. An alternative proposal is made here. We propose that seeing is a way of acting. It is a particular way of exploring the environment. Activity in internal representations does not generate the experience of seeing. The outside world serves as its own, external, representation. The experience of seeing occurs when the organism masters what we call the governing laws of sensorimotor contingency. The advantage of this approach is that it provides a natural and principled way of accounting for visual consciousness, and for the differences in the perceived quality of sensory experience in the different sensory modalities. Several lines of empirical evidence are brought forward in support of the theory, in particular: evidence from experiments in sensorimotor adaptation, visual \"filling in,\" visual stability despite eye movements, change blindness, sensory substitution, and color perception.

A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness-Authors' Response-Acting out our sensory experience

Many current neurophysiological, psychophysical, and psychological approaches to vision rest on the idea that when we see, the brain produces an internal representation of the world. The activation of this internal representation is assumed to give rise to the experience of seeing. The problem with this kind of approach is that it leaves unexplained how the existence of such a detailed internal representation might produce visual consciousness. An alternative proposal is made here. We propose that seeing is a way of acting. It is a particular way of exploring the environment. Activity in internal representations does not generate the experience of seeing. The outside world serves as its own, external, representation. The experience of seeing occurs when the organism masters what we call the governing laws of sensorimotor contingency. The advantage of this approach is that it provides a natural and principled way of accounting for visual consciousness, and for the differences in the perceived quality of sensory experience in the different sensory modalities. Several lines of empirical evidence are brought forward in support of the theory, in particular: evidence from experiments in sensorimotor adaptation, visual “filling in,” visual stability despite eye movements, change blindness, sensory substitution, and color perception.

/pdf/a-sensorimotor-account-of-vision-and-visual-consciousness-1o8kf5szfs.pdf

A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness

We investigated grapheme–colour synaesthesia and found that: (1) The induced colours led to perceptual grouping and pop-out, (2) a grapheme rendered invisible through ‘crowding’ or lateral masking induced synaesthetic colours — a form of blindsight — and (3) peripherally presented graphemes did not induce colours even when they were clearly visible. Taken collectively, these and other experiments prove conclusively that synaesthesia is a genuine perceptual phenomenon, not an effect based on memory associations from childhood or on vague metaphorical speech. We identify different subtypes of number–colour synaesthesia and propose that they are caused by hyperconnectivity between colour and number areas at different stages in processing; lower synaesthetes may have cross-wiring (or cross-activation) within the fusiform gyrus, whereas higher synaesthetes may have cross-activation in the angular gyrus. This hyperconnectivity might be caused by a genetic mutation that causes defective pruning of connections between brain maps. The mutation may further be expressed selectively (due to transcription factors) in the fusiform or angular gyri, and this may explain the existence of different forms of synaesthesia. If expressed very diffusely, there may be extensive cross-wiring between brain regions that represent abstract concepts, which would explain the link between creativity, metaphor and synaesthesia (and the higher incidence of synaesthesia among artists and poets). Also, hyperconnectivity between the sensory cortex and amygdala would explain the heightened aversion synaesthetes experience when seeing numbers printed in the ‘wrong’ colour. Lastly, kindling (induced hyperconnectivity in the temporal lobes of temporal lobe epilepsy [TLE] patients) may explain the purported higher incidence of synaesthesia in these patients . We conclude with a synaesthesia-based theory of the evolution of language. Thus, our experiments on synaesthesia and our theoretical framework attempt to link several seemingly unrelated facts about the human mind. Far from being a mere curiosity, synaesthesia may provide a window into perception, thought and language. www.imprint-academic.com/rama copyright © Journal of Consciousness Studies, 8, No. 12, 2001, pp. 3–34 Correspondence: Center for Brain and Cognition, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Dr. 0109, La Jolla, CA 92093-0109, e-mail: vramacha@ucsd.edu

Synaesthesia? A window into perception, thought and language

https://www.cell.com/trends/cognitive-sciences/pdf/S1364-6613(04)00021-X.pdf

Cortical midline structures and the self

Second Chances: Men, Women, and Children a Decade After Divorce

Neuroscientist V. S. Ramachandran, M.D., Ph.D., is internationally renowned not just for his bold insights about the human brain but also for the stunning simplicity of the experiments he devises to solve neurology cases that have baffled his peers (using such tools as Q-Tips, glasses of water, and mirrors). Phantoms in the Brain is a fascinating journey into the deep architecture of the mind. In the bestselling tradition of Oliver Sacks, Dr. Ramachandran and his co-author, noted New York Times science writer Sandra Blakeslee, introduce us to a range of patients suffering from strange neurological afflictions, explain how Dr. Ramachandran's evaluations reveal what actually occurs in the brain, and explore what these findings reveal about our dreams, laughter, memory, depression, body image, and language -- in short, the very things that make us human. These mesmerizing cases illuminate elusive aspects of the brain: why we think the way we do, how we reason, how we deceive ourselves, and perhaps even why we are so clever at philosophy, music, and art. Some examples: -- A blind woman unerringly reaches out to grasp a pen -- and challenges us to find the true seat of vision. -- A woman who believes that her paralyzed arm is lifting a tray of drinks offers a look at the neurology of delusion -- and a unique opportunity to test Freud's theories of denial. -- A young man who insists that his parents are impostors reveals how the brain weaves meaning from the millions of incidents that compose a life. -- A woman who hallucinates cartoon characters suffers from a disorder that may have spawned James Thurber's famed flights of visual fancy -- and illustrates how in a sense we are all hallucinating, all the time. These are stories of inspired medical detective work that push the boundaries of medicine's last great frontier -- human mind -- and bring us face-to-face with new and provocative ideas about the "big questions" of the self.

Sandra Blakeslee

Papers

Second Chances: Men, Women, and Children a Decade After Divorce

Phantoms in the Brain: Probing the Mysteries of the Human Mind

The Unexpected Legacy of Divorce: A 25 Year Landmark Study

Phantoms in the Brain

The body has a mind of its own : how body maps in your brain help you do (almost) everything better