Neuropsychological impairments in emotion recognition compared to general cognition: profiles across six different neurological disorders.

Heegers A, Rakers SE, Timmerman ME, Westerhof-Evers HJ, Aben HP, van den Berg E, van den Berg NS, Fieldhouse JLP, Gerritsen MJJ, Groen RJM, de Haan EHF, Huitema RB, Jiskoot LC, Jorna LS, Khosdelazad S, de Kort PLM, Kramer MCA, van Laar T, Pijnenburg YAL, Seelaar H, Siebenga FF, Strijkert F, van der Weide HL, van der Zee S, Buunk AM, Spikman JM.

J Neurol · 2026-06-27

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

ObjectiveSocial cognition, particularly emotion recognition, can be impaired in neurological disorders involving brain damage and neurocognitive deficits. However, it remains unclear whether distinctive profiles of social versus general cognitive impairments exist across neurological patient groups: moderate-severe traumatic brain injury (mod-sevTBI), acute ischaemic stroke (AIS), aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (aSAH), frontal low-grade glioma (LGG), advanced Parkinson's disease (PD), and behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD).MethodsData were obtained from scientific studies and clinical records in four Dutch research centres. Neuropsychological testing included emotion recognition [Eckman 60-Faces test (EFT): total score and subscores], memory [Dutch Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (DRAVLT): encoding and retrieval], information processing speed, and cognitive control (Trail Making Test A and B). Scores were transformed into Z-scores using normative data and compared across groups.ResultsIncluded were 710 patients: 118 mod-sevTBI, 93 AIS, 121 aSAH, 100 LGG, 147 PD, 131 bvFTD. EFT-total was impaired in all groups (p InterpretationEmotion recognition is significantly affected across six neurological patient groups, with distinct profiles relative to general cognition. These findings support tailored neuropsychological assessment in clinical practice.

Scientific assessment

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.