Neuropsicologia Dianamica

ABSTRACT
This article suggests thatcross-cultural neuropsychology may provide to behavioral neurosciences a more accurate understanding of brain organization of cognitive processes under normal and abnormal conditions. The influence of a vast array of moderating variables, including culture, ecological demands, and educational performance, is emphasized. Different cultural environmentalcontexts result in the development of different patterns of abilities. Taking as an example the spatial abilities, this article notes that the application of basic cognitive abilities may have evolved with new living and cultural conditions; and currently, they are applied to some previously non-existing conceptual abilities. Educational level has been observed to represent a crucial variable inneuropsychological test performance. However, as a consequence of the low ceiling of most neuropsychological tests, educational effects represent a negatively accelerated curve, tending to a plateau. Finally, this article emphasizes that the evaluation of an alien cultural group using our current neuropsychoiogical instruments, procedures, and norms may result in serious conceptual errors in assessment.Introduction
During recent years, neuropsychology has tremendously advanced in some specific areas. The assessment of the sequelae of brain pathology (e.g., Lezak, 1995) and the establishment of clinical/anatomical correlations for different neuropsychological syndromes (e.g., Damasio et al., 1989; Kertesz, 1994) represent just two examples. However, our fundamental and basic knowledge aboutbrain organization of cognition under normal and pathological condit'ions is still scarce. Theorization is evidently poor. Sufficiently strong mathematical procedures have not been applied yet to the analysis of the structure of cognitive activity in neuropsychology. Neuropsychology has barely dealt with individual differences in cognitive performance (e.g., Hartlage et al., 1985; Vernon, 1994). Andour understanding of cultural differences is, to be optimistic, very limited (see Ardila, 1995; Helm, 1992). Matthews (1992,p. 421), in his International Neuropsychological Society presidential address, stated that "a very limited kind of neuropsychology, appropriate to only a fraction of the world's population, is presented to the rest of the world as if there could be no other kind ofneuropsychology, and as if the education and cultural assumptions on which ... neuropsychology is based were obviously universals that applied everywhere in the world."
Cross-cultural neuropsychology represents a potentially important approach for neuropsychology. This cross-cultural analysis may give us a better understanding of brain organization under both normal and abnormal conditions (see Ardila,1993a, 1995).
For many years, anthropology and linguistics have attempted to find out basic and universal ways of social organization in different human groups (see Van den Berghe, 1979), and fundamental language characteristics (see Greenberg, 1978; Hagege, 1982). Attempts have been made to infer social organization of prehistoric humans and languages existing before living languages. Anexcellent example of this last point is the reconstruction obtained for the Indo-European language (see Anderson, 1973; Lehmann, 1974; Martinet, 1975), whose last speaker passed away several thousand years ago. And efforts have been made to reconstruct even older proto-languages (see Shevoroshkin, 1990).
Anthropology and linguistics have used three different approaches in their attempts to reconstructthe way of life and the languages of prehistoric people:
1. Archeological findings are used as elements to reconstruct prehistoric ways of life.
2. Via comparison of prehistoric to existing human groups, we can find some common social, behavioral, and linguistic characteristics. Such characteristics probably are the result of our specific biological adaptation, and can be considered...