Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology

2018 Edition
| Editors: Jeffrey S. Kreutzer, John DeLuca, Bruce Caplan


  • Melissa AmickEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57111-9_1343


Object agnosia; Tactile agnosia

Short Description or Definition

Astereognosis is defined as the inability to identify objects through touch without visual input.


Astereognosis has been subdivided into primary and secondary recognition deficits. Primary recognition deficits, also called morphognosia, reflect impairments in recognizing the physical features of the object (e.g., weight or texture). Secondary recognition deficits reflect a specific impairment in object recognition with spared primary recognition (for review, see De Renzi 1982).


Astereognosis can be common after stroke with one report indicating that up to 90% of patients demonstrate astereognosis (Connell et al. 2008). Damage to the cortical regions important for haptic input integration can cause astereognosis. This disorder, therefore, is common and can occur in the presence of many neurological disorders including brain (e.g., Knecht et al. 1996) or spinal cord tumors (Lesoin et al. 1986...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References and Readings

  1. Benton, A. L. (1969). Stereognosis test; Manual of instructions. Victoria: Neuropsychology Laboratory, Department of Psychology, University of Victoria.Google Scholar
  2. Connell, L. A., Lincoln, N. B., & Radford, K. A. (2008). Somatosensory impairment after stroke: Frequency of different deficits and their recovery. Clinical Rehabilitation, 22, 758–767.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. De Renzi, E. (1982). Disorders of space exploration and cognition. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  4. Gaubert, C. S., & Mockett, S. P. (2000). Inter-rater reliability of the Nottingham method of stereognosis assessment. Clinical Rehabilitation, 14(2), 153–159.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hom, J., & Reitan, R. M. (1982). Effect of lateralized cerebral damage upon contralateral and ipsilateral sensorimotor performances. Journal of Clinical Neuropsychology, 4(3), 249–268.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Knecht, S., Kunesch, E., & Schnitzler, A. (1996). Parallel and serial processing of haptic information in man: Effects of parietal lesions on sensorimotor hand function. Neuropsychologia, 34, 669–687.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lesoin, F., Rousseaux, M., Martin, H. J., Petit, H., & Jomin, M. J. (1986). Astereognosis and amyotrophy of the hand with neurinoma of the second cervical nerve root. Neurology, 233, 57–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lincoln, N. B., Crow, J. L., Jackson, J. M., Waters, G. R., Adams, S. A., & Hodgson, P. (1991). The unreliability of sensory assessment. Clinical Rehabilitation, 5, 273–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Reitan, R. M., & Wolfson, D. (1993). The Halstead-Reitan neuropsychological test battery: Theory and clinical interpretation. Tucson: Neuropsychology Press.Google Scholar
  10. Yekutiel, M., & Guttman, E. J. (1993). A controlled trial of the retraining of the sensory function of the hand in stroke patients. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 56, 241–244.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Zaidel, E. (1998). Stereognosis in the chronic split brain: Hemispheric differences, ipsilateral control and sensory integration across the midline. Neuropsychologia, 36, 1033–1047.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Psychiatry and Human BehaviorBrown UniversityProvidenceUSA