HHS Public Access

Author manuscript
J Int Neuropsychol Soc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 March 24.
Author Manuscript

Published in final edited form as:

J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2019 March ; 25(3): 324–330. doi:10.1017/S135561771800111X.

The Neuropsychological Syndrome of Agenesis of the Corpus

Callosum
Warren S. Brown1, Lynn K. Paul2
1Fuller
Graduate School of Psychology, Travis Research Institute, 180 N. Oakland Ave.,
Pasadena, CA 91101, USA
2CaliforniaInstitute of Technology, Division of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1200 E. California
Author Manuscript

Blvd., Pasadena, CA 91125, USA

Abstract
Background: Agenesis of the corpus callosum (AgCC) involves congenital absence of all or part
of the corpus callosum. Because the disorder can only be firmly diagnosed via neuroradiology, it
has a short research history, and only recently has the cognitive syndrome become clear.

Purpose: Our purpose is to review the primary deficits in AgCC that constitute the core
syndrome.

Conclusions: The cores syndrome includes: (1) Reduced interhemispheric transfer of sensory-
motor information; (2) Reduced cognitive processing speed; (3) Deficits in complex reasoning and
novel problem-solving. These domains do not appear to reflect different neuroanatomical
Author Manuscript

abnormalities, but rather different domains of expression of reduced interhemispheric

communication from callosal absence.

Implications: These core deficits are expressed across various domains of cognitive, behavioral,
and social functioning. The impact of these deficits varies across development and may be
moderated by individual factors such as cooccurrence of other neurodevelopmental conditions,
general intellectual capacity, and environmental support.

Keywords
corpus callosum; agenesis of the corpus callosum

Introduction
Author Manuscript

This paper describes what we believe to be the core syndrome of agenesis of the corpus
callosum (AgCC) as displayed in adults who have few, if any, other neurological
abnormalities, and have grossly intact general intelligence. Although AgCC was previously
thought to be exceedingly rare, increased clinical use of neuroimaging has resulted in higher
detection rates in relatively normally functioning individuals. Studies conducted with this
larger pool of patients are providing greater understanding of the role of the corpus callosum

Corresponding Author: Warren S. Brown, Fuller Graduate School of Psychology, 180 N. Oakland Ave. Pasadena, CA 91101,
wsbrown@fuller.edu 626-584-5525—office.
 Brown and Paul Page 2

in cognition and behavior. The accumulating data also provides families and clinicians with
Author Manuscript

more nuanced insights into the patterns of cognitive capacities that influence learning, daily
behaviors, and developmental progression of individuals with AgCC.

AgCC is a congenital brain malformation defined by anatomy (complete or partial absence

of the corpus callosum), and not defined by behavior abnormalities (as in autism). AgCC
occurs due to disruption of neural development during the 7th to 20th embryonic weeks
(Edwards, Sherr, Barkovich, & Richards, 2014). The most recent evidence indicates that
AgCC occurs in at least 1 in 4,000 births, making it one of the more commonly occurring
congenital brain disorders (Glass, Shaw, Ma, & Sherr, 2008; Guillem, Fabre, Cans, Robert-
Gnansia, & Jouk, 2003; Wang, Huang, & Yeh, 2004).

AgCC is often associated with a broader syndrome of brain malformation related to known
toxic-metabolic conditions or genetic causes, but in 55-70% of AgCC cases the cause is
Author Manuscript

unknown (Bedeschi et al., 2006; Schell-Apacik et al., 2008; Tang et al., 2009). When part of
a broader neurodevelopmental syndrome or accompanied by other congenital brain
malformations, the cognitive and behavioral impact of these other conditions would likely
obscure the moderate to mild deficiencies directly related to callosal absence. In order to
identify the specific contributions of the corpus callosum to higher cognitive abilities, this
review describes the AgCC syndrome as it appears in individuals without any (or only very
minor) other brain or body dysmorphology. These individuals typically have normal-range
IQs and appear neurologically “asymptomatic” (i.e., lack of symptoms apparent in
diagnostic procedures typically used in clinical neurology). In most of these individuals
AgCC is discovered through routine prenatal sonogram or neuroimaging motivated by
unrelated issues. In these cases, AgCC is likely to be the primary contributor to the cognitive
outcome, and thus we refer to these individuals as having “Primary AgCC”.
Author Manuscript

Although they have a common primary neurological finding, individuals with Primary
AgCC are somewhat heterogeneous with respect to other minor structural brain
abnormalities, some of which appear to be secondary to the callosal dysgenesis (e.g.
colpocephaly, Probst Bundles) and some of which may or may not be related to the callosum
(e.g. minor areas of heterotopia, interhemispheric cysts, interhemispheric lipoma). The
group also varies with regard to amount of residual callosal connection (complete vs.
partial), and most certainly varies at the molecular and synaptic level. To minimize the
negative influence of concomitant neurological abnormalities, this review focuses on
individuals with a full scale IQ above 80. Heterogeneity notwithstanding, we present what
we believe to be the core syndrome which results in the mild to moderate cognitive and
psychosocial deficits in Primary AgCC.
Author Manuscript

Finally, since the corpus callosum in neurotypical children is undergoing significant

myelinization and functional development into the teenage years (Giedd et al., 1994;
Yakovlev, Lecours, & Minkovski, 1967), the neuropsychological and psychosocial outcomes
of AgCC seem to ‘emerge’ as their peers increase reliance on callosal connectivity. Thus,
our commentary focuses on studies of older adolescents and adults.

J Int Neuropsychol Soc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 March 24.
 Brown and Paul Page 3

The Core Syndrome of Primary AgCC

Author Manuscript

The aim of this paper is to briefly sketch the core syndrome of Primary AgCC (i.e., deficits
specifically related to callosal absence) which in turn contributes to more specific
neuropsychological and psychosocial deficits in AgCC. The following sections will offer
evidence from published literature (including much of our own research) demonstrating that
Primary AgCC is associated with a core syndrome involving:

1. Reduced interhemispheric transfer of sensory-motor information;

2. Increased cognitive processing time;

3. Deficient processing of complex information and unfamiliar tasks: amplified

vulnerability to increases in cognitive demands.

These three domains of dysfunction are not independent. Reduced interhemispheric

Author Manuscript

interactions likely contribute to slower processing time and difficulty in complex problem-
solving, which are themselves inter-related. These core deficits contribute to many other
specific deficiencies we describe briefly (see figure 1).

Diminished Interhemispheric Integration of Sensory-Motor Information

The current understanding of callosal function came primarily from studying individuals
who had a surgical commissurotomy – severing of all of the cerebral commissures as a
treatment for epilepsy. Commissurotomy and AgCC both result in a lack of callosal
connections between hemispheres, but they are distinguished by (1) the presence of the other
cerebral commissures in most cases of AgCC (e.g., anterior commissure is present in all
cases of AgCC we describe), and (2) by the point in development at which the hemispheres
are disconnected. Early investigations of interhemispheric transfer and integration of sensory
Author Manuscript

and motor information in AgCC discovered that congenital absence of callosal connections
does not cause a full “disconnection syndrome” as is seen following commissurotomy
(Sperry, 1968; Bogen & Frederiks, 1985; Sperry, Gazzaniga, Bogen, Vinken, & Bruyn,
1969).

Unlike commissurotomy, limitations of interhemispheric transfer in AgCC are contingent

upon the complexity of information being transferred. Numerous studies have shown that
individuals with AgCC are capable of interhemispheric integration of easily encoded visual
and tactile information (e.g., Brown, Jeeves, Dietrich, & Burnison, 1999; Chiarello, 1980;
Jeeves & Ettlinger, 1965; Lassonde, Sauerwein, Chicoine, & Geoffroy, 1991; Saul & Sperry,
1968). However, diminished interhemispheric transfer in AgCC is evident in studies
requiring transfer of more complex (and less familiar) information (e.g., Brown et al., 1999;
Author Manuscript

Bryden & Zurif, 1970; Buchanan, Waterhouse, & West Jr., 1980; Geffen, Nilsson, Quinn, &
Teng, 1985; Jeeves, 1979).

A study by Brown et al. (1999) illustrates key differences in interhemispheric transfer of

sensory information in individuals with AgCC and individuals with commissurotomy
through the use of two tachistoscopic bilateral visual field matching tasks (letters and dot-
patterns). As predicted by studies of the ‘disconnection syndrome’, the two
commissurotomy patients in this study could not match bilateral presentations of either

J Int Neuropsychol Soc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 March 24.
 Brown and Paul Page 4

letters or dot-patterns above the level of chance. In contrast, participants with AgCC
Author Manuscript

performed as well as neurotypical controls when matching two bilaterally and

simultaneously flashed letters, with their limitations in interhemispheric transfer only
becoming evident in impaired bilateral visual field matching of the less familiar and easily
encoded random dot patterns.

The mediating effect of encoding complexity on interhemispheric transfer in AgCC has also
been demonstrated in studies of tactual-spatial information transfer using the Tactual
Performance Test (Dunn, Paul, Schieffer, & Brown, 2000; Sauerwein & Lassonde, 1994;
Sauerwein, Lassonde, Cardu, & Geoffroy, 1981), Finger Localization Test (Dunn et al.,
2000; Geffen et al., 1985; Sauerwein & Lassonde, 1994) and tactual recognition (Jeeves &
Silver, 1988). As with sensory transfer, individuals with AgCC exhibited intact performance
at the lowest levels of sensory-motor difficulty, with significant declines in performance
occurring as tasks requiring transfer of more complex (less easily encoded) information.
Author Manuscript

Finally, limitations in interhemispheric transmission also interfere with fine motor

coordination of the two hands in individuals with AgCC (Jeeves, Silver, & Jacobson, 1988;
Jeeves, Silver, & Milner, 1988), as well as in individuals with surgical transection of either
the anterior or posterior callosum (Eliassen, Baynes, & Gazzaniga, 2000; Preilowski, 1972).
Using the Bimanual Coordination Test (BCT) – a test based on an Etch-a-Sketch toy
(Brown, 1991) – we found that bimanual motor coordination was slower and less accurate in
adults with AgCC than in neurotypical adults (Mueller, Marion, Paul, & Brown, 2009), but
performance of adults with AgCC was similar to that of neurotypical children for whom the
corpus callosum was not yet fully developed (Marion, Kilian, Naramor, & Brown, 2003).
Notably, even in neurotypical adults, poor structural integrity of motor connections via the
corpus callosum becomes more strongly associated with poor bimanual coordination
Author Manuscript

performance as task complexity increases (Gooijers, et al, 2013).

Reduced Speed of Cognitive Processing

Speed is a fundamental feature of all cognitive processes. Consequently, slow processing
speed may interfere with abilities in multiple domains. Processing speed is highly vulnerable
to disruptions in white matter connectivity, particularly the CC (Solmaz et al., 2017;
Ubukata et al., 2016; Kourtidou, et al, 2012; Mathias, et al., 2004). Studies described in the
previous section offer clear evidence of slowed sensory and motor reaction times in
individuals with AgCC. Slow processing speed is also evident in other cognitive tests. For
example, in a sample of 32 adults with complete AgCC, we found that WAIS-III processing
speed index scores were significantly lower on average than verbal, perceptual, and working
memory indices (Erickson, Young, Paul, & Brown, 2013).
Author Manuscript

Slow processing speed was also implicated in a study of cognitive inhibition in adults with
AgCC. On the Color-Word subtest of the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System, we
found deficient cognitive inhibition and flexibility in adults with AgCC compared to age-
and IQ-matched controls, but regression analyses indicated that these differences in
cognitive control were primarily the consequence of slowed processing speed (Marco et al.,
2012). Thus, processing speed limitations may have wide-ranging implications for cognition
and behavior in AgCC. However, as found in studies of callosal damage in traumatic brain

J Int Neuropsychol Soc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 March 24.
 Brown and Paul Page 5

injury, impairments in processing speed are exacerbated on tasks with greater information
Author Manuscript

processing demands (Mathias, et al, 2004).

Difficulty with Complex Processing

Psychometric research in neurotypical adults has demonstrated that interhemispheric
resources are recruited to assist with cognitively complex tasks (Koivisto, 2000; Reuter-
Lorenz et al., 1999; Weissman & Banich, 2000) and simple tasks that are unfamiliar /
unpracticed (Norman et al, 1992). However, the benefit of interhemispheric processing
decreases with practice (Cherbuin & Brinkman, 2005; Maertens & Pollmann, 2005;
Weissman & Compton, 2003). In keeping with this finding, adults with Primary AgCC
display amplified vulnerability to increases in cognitive demands, resulting in impaired
reasoning, concept formation, and novel complex problem-solving, (i.e., deficits in fluid
intelligence). By contrast, they do not have deficits in overlearned cognitive processes (i.e.,
Author Manuscript

crystallized intelligence), as supported by relatively normal (or even elevated) performance

on most verbal and spatial portions of standardized intelligence scales (Erickson, Young,
Paul, & Brown, 2013) and on tests of basic academic skills such as single-word reading,
spelling, and math calculation (Young, Erickson, Paul, & Brown, 2013).

Impairments in abstract reasoning (Brown & Paul, 2000; David, Wacharasindhu, &
Lishman, 1993; Gott & Saul, 1978), concept formation (Fischer, Ryan, & Dobyns, 1992;
Imamura, Yamadori, Shiga, Sahara, & Abiko, 1994), problem-solving (Brown, Anderson,
Symington, & Paul, 2012; Schieffer, Paul, & Brown, 2000), and generalization (Solursh,
Margulies, Ashem, & Stasiak, 1965) have all been observed in patients with AgCC. Such
deficiencies are particularly evident as task complexity increases (Schieffer, Paul, & Brown,
2000). For example, on the simplified (color) version of the Raven’s Progressive Matrices
Tests (Raven, 1960, 1965) performance of adults with AgCC was consistent with individual
Author Manuscript

Full-Scale IQ (FSIQ) scores, but performance was impaired relative to FSIQ on the more
complex Standard Progressive Matrices (Schieffer, Paul, & Brown, 2000). The benefits of
practice in Primary AgCC are supported by patterns of academic achievement in a sample of
adults who performed within average range on basic mathematic calculations (a skill
practiced throughout school), but exhibited significant deficits on math reasoning (Wechsler
Individual Achievement Test-II; Hanna, 2018).

Associated Cognitive and Psychosocial Deficiencies

These three core cognitive deficiencies impact a wider range of cognitive and psychosocial
functioning. Adults with AgCC have difficulties encoding verbal and visual information in
memory and spontaneously retrieving newly learned information (Erickson et al., 2014;
Author Manuscript

Paul, Erickson, Hartman, & Brown, 2016), adequately understanding non-literal and
complex language (Brown, Paul, Symington, & Dietrich, 2005; Brown, Symington, Van
Lancker-Sidtis, Dietrich, & Paul, 2005; Paul, Van Lancker-Sidtis, Schieffer, Dietrich, &
Brown, 2003; Rehmel, Brown, & Paul, 2016), exerting cognitive inhibition and flexibility
(Marco et al., 2012), formulating strategies (Brown et al., 2012) and effectively applying
imagination and creativity (Paul, Schieffer, & Brown, 2004; Young et al., under review). In
addition, these core cognitive deficits negatively impact social and emotional cognition,

J Int Neuropsychol Soc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 March 24.
 Brown and Paul Page 6

resulting in difficulty reasoning abstractly about emotions in social context (Anderson, Paul,
Author Manuscript

& Brown, 2017; Paul et al., 2006), expressing emotions in words (Pazienza, Paul, & Brown,
2011), interpreting sarcasm and understanding subtle aspects of social interactions
(Symington, Paul, Symington, Ono, & Brown, 2010), recognizing emotion in faces
(Bridgman et al., 2014), imagining and inferring the mental, emotional, and social
functioning of others (Kang, Paul, Castelli, & Brown, 2009; Turk, Brown, Symington, &
Paul, 2010) and awareness of functional deficits (Kaplan, Brown, Adolphs, & Paul, 2012;
Mangum, 2018; Miller, Su, Paul, & Brown, 2018). Although they appear to be secondary
products of diminished interhemispheric interactions, slowed processing time, and deficient
complex problem solving, these associated cognitive and social deficits may result in
functionally significant impairments in adaptive skills needed in daily life (Miller, Su, Paul,
& Brown, 2018; Mangum, 2018) and reciprocal social communication (Paul, Corsello,
Kennedy, & Adolphs, 2014).
Author Manuscript

Moderating Factors
Expression of these core deficits will vary across the lifespan, as a consequence of
neuroanatomic variations and concomitant conditions, and in relation to individual traits and
context. We offer brief comments on each of these influences.

Since the corpus callosum in neurotypical children is undergoing significant myelinization

and functional development into the teenage years (Giedd et al., 1994; Yakovlev et al.,
1967), the core deficits of AgCC described above may not become pronounced relative to
peers prior to late childhood (Paul et al., 2007). Consistent with this, we found that
processing speed and problem-solving scores were consistent with FSIQ in younger children
with Primary AgCC, but fell significantly below FSIQ in an older sample (over 13yrs;
Author Manuscript

Schieffer, Paul, Schilmoeller, & Brown, 2000). Nonetheless, older children with AgCC may
fall behind their peers when tasks are sufficiently complex (Garrels et al., 2001) or novel
(Young et al., 2013) for their developmental level. Thus, tasks that can be mastered through
practice, such as reading and arithmetic, are more likely to be impaired in children with
AgCC than in adults. In contrast, tasks such as social interaction and complex problem
solving become increasingly complex in adolescence and remain complex and somewhat
novel throughout life, posing an ongoing challenge to individuals with AgCC (e.g., Kang et
al., 2009; Turk et al., 2010; Mangum, 2018; Miller, Su, Paul, & Brown, 2018).

It is reasonable to expect that the impact of AgCC would vary in relation to degree of
callosal absence, with partial AgCC resulting in less severe manifestations of these
deficiencies than complete AgCC. However, although most of the research cited in this
paper focused on complete AgCC, studies that included persons with partial AgCC found
Author Manuscript

their performances were distributed among the results of individuals with complete. While
the explanation for this is not yet clear, it is possible that outcomes in partial AgCC are
impacted by individual variations in how the remaining callosal interhemispheric
connections are organized (Wahl et al., 2009).

Up to 45% of individuals with AgCC have a known chromosomal abnormality or

recognizable genetic syndrome, often resulting in additional neuropathology and/or medical

J Int Neuropsychol Soc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 March 24.
 Brown and Paul Page 7

conditions (i.e., not Primary ACC). The nature and severity of these additional conditions
Author Manuscript

will influence expression of the core deficits from AgCC and at the extreme may render the
core deficits functionally irrelevant in daily life.

Finally, there are inherent variations between individuals, as well as environmental

influences. For example, although general intelligence did not account for the core deficits
described herein, general intelligence or specific skill sets may modulate an individual’s
complexity threshold and markedly impact an individuals’ daily adaptive functioning.

Conclusion
Research has accumulated over the last two decades allowing for the description of a pattern
of deficits characteristic of AgCC. We have argued for a core syndrome associated with
callosal absence in AgCC involving reduced interhemispheric transfer of sensory-motor
Author Manuscript

information, slowed cognitive processing speed, and deficits in complex reasoning and novel
problem-solving. However, because these cognitive deficiencies are typically mild to
moderate, they are often not easily recognized. It is our hope that better description of the
cognitive and psychosocial impact of AgCC will increase the likelihood of a diagnostic MRI
in these high-functioning cases, as well as provide more complete information and helpful
guidance to patients and their families regarding the likely consequences of this congenital
brain disorder.

Acknowledgements
The authors of this paper declare that they have no conflicts of interest with respect to the writing of this paper or
the information contained. The writing of this paper was also not supported by grant funding.
Author Manuscript

References
Anderson LB, Paul LK, & Brown WS (2017). Emotional intelligence in agenesis of the corpus
callosum. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 32(3), 267–279. doi:10.1093/arclin/acx001
[PubMed: 28431033]
Bedeschi MF, Bonaglia MC, Grasso R, Pellegri A, Garghentino RR, Battaglia MA, … Borgatti R
(2006). Agenesis of the corpus callosum: clinical and genetic study in 63 young patients. Pediatric
Neurology, 34(3), 186–193. doi: 10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2005.08.008 [PubMed: 16504787]
Bogen J, & Frederiks J (1985). Split-brain syndromes. Handbook of Clinical Neurology (Vol. 45, pp.
99–106). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Science Publishing Co.
Bridgman MW, Brown WS, Spezio ML, Leonard MK, Adolphs R, & Paul LK (2014). Facial emotion
recognition in agenesis of the corpus callosum. Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, 6.
doi:10.1186/1866-1955-6-32
Brown WS (1991). The Bimanual Coordination Test: Version 1. The Travis Research Institute Papers.
Brown WS, Anderson LB, Symington MF, & Paul LK (2012). Decision-making in individuals with
Author Manuscript

agenesis of the corpus callosum: expectancy-valence in the Iowa Gambling Task. Archives of
Clinical Neuropsychology, 27(5), 532–544. doi:10.1093/arclin/acs052 [PubMed: 22721927]
Brown WS, Jeeves MA, Dietrich R, & Burnison DS (1999). Bilateral field advantage and evoked
potential interhemispheric transmission in commissurotomy and callosal agenesis.
Neuropsychologia, 37(10), 1165–1180. [PubMed: 10509838]
Brown WS, & Paul LK (2000). Cognitive and psychosocial deficits in agenesis of the corpus callosum
with normal intelligence. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 5(2), 135–157.
Brown WS, Paul LK, Symington M, and Dietrich R (2005). Comprehension of humor in primary
agenesis of the corpus callosum. Neuropsychologia, 43, 906–916. [PubMed: 15716161]

J Int Neuropsychol Soc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 March 24.
 Brown and Paul Page 8

Brown WS, Symington M, VanLancker D, Dietrich R and Paul LK (2005). Paralinguistic processing in
children with callosal agenesis: Emergence of neurolinguistic deficits. Brain and Language, 93,
Author Manuscript

135–139. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2004.09.008 [PubMed: 15781301]

Bryden MP, & Zurif EB (1970). Dichotic listening performance in a case of agenesis of the corpus
callosum. Neuropsychologia, 8(3), 371–377. [PubMed: 5522567]
Buchanan DC, Waterhouse GJ, & West SC Jr. (1980). A proposed neurophysiological basis of
alexithymia. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 34, 248–255. [PubMed: 7280165]
Cherbuin N, & Brinkman C (2005). Practice makes two hemispheres almost perfect. Cognitive Brain
Research, 24(3), 413–422. [PubMed: 16099354]
Chiarello C (1980). A house divided? Cognitive functioning with callosal agenesis. Brain and
Language, 11, 128–158. [PubMed: 7427714]
David AS, Wacharasindhu A, & Lishman WA (1993). Severe psychiatric disturbance and
abnormalities of the corpus callosum: review and case series. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery,
and Psychiatry, 56, 85–93.
Dunn C, Paul L, Schieffer B, & Brown W (2000). Spatial tactile interhemispheric transfer and task
complexity in agenesis of the corpus callosum [Abstract]. Presented at the Twenty-Eighth Annual
Author Manuscript

International Neuropsychological Society Conference: February 9–12, 2000 Denver, Colorado.

Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 6(2), 165.
Edwards TJ, Sherr EH, Barkovich AJ, & Richards LJ (2014). Clinical, genetic and imaging findings
identify new causes for corpus callosum development syndromes. Brain, 137, 1579–1613.
doi:10.1093/brain/awt358 [PubMed: 24477430]
Eliassen JC, Baynes K, & Gazzaniga MS (2000). Anterior and posterior callosal contributions to
simultaneous bimanual movements of the hands and fingers. Brain, 123 Pt 12, 2501–2511.
[PubMed: 11099451]
Erickson RL, Paul LK, & Brown WS (2014). Verbal learning and memory in agenesis of the corpus
callosum. Neuropsychologia, 60, 121–130. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.06.003 [PubMed:
24933663]
Erickson RL, Young C, Paul LK, & Brown WS (2013). WAIS-III index scores in individuals with
agenesis of the corpus callosum [Abstract]. Presented at the Forty First Annual Meeting
International Neuropsychological Society February 6–9, 2013 Waikoloa, Hawaii, USA. Journal of
the International Neuropsychological Society, 19(S1), 224.
Author Manuscript

Fischer M, Ryan SB, & Dobyns WB (1992). Mechanisms of interhemispheric transfer and patterns of
cognitive function in acallosal patients of normal intelligence. Archives of Neurology, 49(3), 271–
277. [PubMed: 1536630]
Garrels SR, Paul LK, Schieffer BM, Florendo EV, Fox MM, Turk AA, & Brown WS (2001). Abstract
problem solving in children with callosal agenesis [Abstract]. Presented at the Twenty-Ninth
Annual International Neuropsychological Society Conference, February 14–17, 2001 Chicago,
Illinois. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 7(2), 258.
Geffen G, Nilsson J, Quinn K, & Teng EL (1985). The effects of lesions of the corpus callosum on
finger localization. Neuropsychologia, 23, 497–514. [PubMed: 4033904]
Giedd JN, Castellanos FX, Casey BJ, Kozuch P, King AC, Hamburger SD, & Rapoport JL (1994).
Quantitative morphology of the corpus callosum in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
American Journal of Psychiatry, 151(5), 665–669.
Glass H, Shaw G, Ma C, & Sherr EH (2008). Agenesis of the corpus callosum in California
1983-2003: a population-based study. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 146A(19, 2495–
Author Manuscript

2500. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.32418 [PubMed: 18642362]

Gooijers J, Caeyenberghs K, Sisti HM, Geurts M, Heitger MH, Leemans A, Swinnen SP (2013)
Diffusion tensor imaging metrics of the corpus callosum in relation to bimanual coordination:
effect of task complexity and sensory feedback. Human Brain Mapping, 34(1), 241–245. doi:
10.1002/hbm.21429 [PubMed: 22021056]
Gott PS, & Saul RE (1978). Agenesis of the corpus callosum: limits of functional compensation.
Neurology, 28(12), 1272–1279. [PubMed: 569786]

J Int Neuropsychol Soc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 March 24.
 Brown and Paul Page 9

Guillem P, Fabre B, Cans C, Robert-Gnansia E, & Jouk PS (2003). Trends in elective terminations of
pregnancy between 1989 and 2000 in a French county (the Isère). Prenatal Diagnosis, 23(11), 877–
Author Manuscript

883. doi:10.1002/pd.711 [PubMed: 14634970]

Hanna S (2018). Academic functioning in individuals with agenesis of the corpus callosum
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Fuller Graduate School of Psychology, Pasadena, California.
Imamura T, Yamadori A, Shiga Y, Sahara M, & Abiko H (1994). Is disturbed transfer of learning in
callosal agenesis due to a disconnection syndrome? Behavioural Neurology, 7, 43–48. [PubMed:
24487287]
Jastak S, & Wilkinson G (1984). The Wide Range Achievement Test: Administration manual.
Wilmington, DE: Jastak Association.
Jeeves MA (1979). Some limits to interhemispheric integration in cases of callosal agenesis and partial
commissurotomy. In Russell IS, Van Hof MW, & Berlucchi G (Eds.), Structure and function of the
cerebral commissures (pp. 449 – 474). London: McMillan.
Jeeves MA, & Ettlinger EG (1965). Psychological studies of the three cases of congenital agenesis of
the corpus callosum. Functions of the Corpus Callosum: CIBA Foundations Study Groups (Vol.
20, pp. 73 – 94).
Author Manuscript

Jeeves MA, & Silver PH (1988). Interhemispheric transfer of spatial tactile information in callosal
agenesis and partial commissurotomy. Cortex, 24, 601–604. [PubMed: 3219875]
Jeeves MA, Silver PH, & Jacobson I (1988). Bimanual co-ordination in callosal agenesis and partial
commissurotomy. Neuropsychologia, 26, 833–850. [PubMed: 3194049]
Jeeves MA, Silver PH, & Milner AD (1988). Role of the corpus callosum in the development of a
bimanual skills. Developmental Neuropsychology, 4, 305–323.
Kang KH, Paul LK, Castelli F, & Brown WS (2009). Theory of mind in agenesis of the corpus
callosum compared to high functioning autism [Abstract]. Poster presented at the Thirty-Seventh
Annual Meeting International Neuropsychological Society: February 11–14, 2009 Atlanta,
Georgia, USA. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 15(S1), 168. doi:10.1017/
S1355617709090420
Kaplan JM, Brown WS, Adolphs R, & Paul LK (2012). Psychological profile in agenesis of the corpus
callosum [Abstract]. Poster presented at the Society for Neuroscience Annual Meeting: October
13- 17, 2012 New Orleans, LA, USA. 198.19.
Author Manuscript

Kourtidou P, McCauley SR, Bigler ED, Traipe E, Wu TC, Chu ZD, Hunter JV, Li X, Levin HS, Wilde
EA (2013). Centrum Semiovale and Corpus Callosum Integrity in Relation to Information
Processing Speed in Patients with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury. Journal of Head Trauma
Rehabilitation, 28(6):433–41. DOI:10.1097/HTR.0b013e3182585d06
Koivisto M (2000). Interhemispheric interaction in semantic categorization of pictures. Cognitive
Brain Research, 9(1), 45–51. PII:S0926-6410(99)00042-7. [PubMed: 10666556]
Lassonde M, Sauerwein H, Chicoine AJ, & Geoffroy G (1991). Absence of disconnexion syndrome in
callosal agenesis and early callosotomy: brain reorganization or lack of structural specificity
during ontogeny? Neuropsychologia, 29(6), 481–495. [PubMed: 1944857]
Maertens M, & Pollmann S (2005). Interhemispheric resource sharing: Decreasing benefit with
increasing processing efficiency. Brain and Cognition, 58(2), 183–192. doi:10.1016/
j.bandc.2004.11.002. [PubMed: 15919550]
Mangum R (2018). Self-understanding of executive function in individuals with agenesis of the corpus
callosum. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Fuller Graduate School of Psychology, Pasadena,
California.
Author Manuscript

Marco EJ, Harrell KM, Brown WS, Hill SS, Jeremy RJ, Kramer JH, … Paul LK (2012). Processing
speed delays contribute to executive function deficits in individuals with agenesis of the corpus
callosum. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 18(3), 521–529. doi:10.1017/
s1355617712000045. [PubMed: 22390821]
Marion SD, Kilian SC, Naramor TL, & Brown WS (2003). Normal development of bimanual
coordination: Visuomotor and interhemispheric contributions. Developmental Neuropsychology,
23(3), 399–421. doi:10.1207/s15326942dn2303_6 [PubMed: 12740193]
Mathias JL, Bigler ED, Jones NR, Bowden SC, Barrett-Woodbridge M, Brown GC & Taylor DJ
(2004) Neuropsychological and Information Processing Performance and Its Relationship to White

J Int Neuropsychol Soc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 March 24.
 Brown and Paul Page 10

Matter Changes Following Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Preliminary Study,
Applied Neuropsychology, 11:3, 134–152. DOI:10.1207/s15324826an1103_2 [PubMed:
Author Manuscript

15590348]
Miller JS, Su JJ, Paul LK, & Brown WS (2018). Adaptive behavior in agenesis of the corpus callosum:
Self and informant reports. [Abstract]. Presented at the Forty First Annual Meeting International
Neuropsychological Society February 14–17, 2018 Washington, DC, USA. Journal of the
International Neuropsychological Society, 24(S1), 195.
Mueller KLO, Marion SD, Paul LK, & Brown WS (2009). Bimanual Motor Coordination in Agenesis
of the Corpus Callosum. Behavioral Neuroscience, 123(5), 1000–1011. doi:10.1037/a0016868
[PubMed: 19824766]
Njiokiktjien C, Ramaekers G, & Njiokiktjien C (1991). Absence of the corpus callosum:
Clinicopathological correlations. Pediatric behavioural neurology: The child’s corpus callosum
(pp. 235 – 250).
Njiokiktjien C, Valk J, & Ramaekers G (1988). Malformation or damage of the corpus callosum? A
clinical and MRI study. Brain Development, 10(2), 92–99. [PubMed: 3389478]
Norman W, Jeeves MA, Milne A, Ludwig T (1992) Hemispheric interactions: the bilateral advantage
Author Manuscript

and task difficulty. Cortex. 28(4):623–42. [PubMed: 1478088]

Paul LK, Brown WS, Adolphs R, Tyszka JM, Richards LJ, Mukherjee P, & Sherr EH (2007). Agenesis
of the corpus callosum: genetic, developmental and functional aspects of connectivity. Nature
Reviews Neuroscience, 5(4), 287–299. doi:10.1038/nrn2107
Paul LK, Corsello C, Kennedy DP, & Adolphs R (2014). Agenesis of the corpus callosum and autism:
a comprehensive comparison. Brain, 137, 1813–1829. doi:10.1093/brain/awu070 [PubMed:
24771497]
Paul LK, Erickson RL, Hartman JA, & Brown WS (2016). Learning and memory in individuals with
agenesis of the corpus callosum. Neuropsychologia, 86, 183–192. doi:10.1016/
j.neuropsychologia.2016.04.013 [PubMed: 27091586]
Paul LK, Lautzenhiser A, Brown WS, Hart A, Neumann D, Spezio M, & Adolphs R (2006). Emotional
arousal in agenesis of the corpus callosum. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 61(1), 47–
56. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2005.10.017 [PubMed: 16759726]
Paul LK, Schieffer B, & Brown WS (2004). Social processing deficits in agenesis of the corpus
callosum: narratives from the Thematic Appreciation Test. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology,
Author Manuscript

19(2), 215–225. doi:10.1016/S0887-6177(03)00024-6 [PubMed: 15010087]

Paul LK, Van Lancker-Sidtis D, Schieffer B, Dietrich R, & Brown WS (2003). Communicative deficits
in agenesis of the corpus callosum: nonliteral language and affective prosody. Brain and Language,
85(2), 313–324. doi:10.1016/s0093-934x(03)00062-2 [PubMed: 12735947]
Pazienza SR, Brown WS, & Paul LK (2011). Emotional expressiveness and somatization in agenesis
of the corpus callosum. [Abstract]. Poster presented at the Thirty-Ninth Annual Meeting
International Neuropsychological Society: February 2–5, 2011 Boston, Massachusetts USA.
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 17(S1), 2. doi:10.1017/
S1355617711000415.
Preilowski BF (1972). Possible contribution of the anterior forebrain commissures to bilateral motor
coordination. Neuropsychologia, 10(3), 267–277. [PubMed: 5080490]
Raven JC (1960). Guide to the Standard Progressive Matrices.
Raven JC (1965). Guide to using the Colored Progressive Matrices.
Rehmel JL, Brown WS, & Paul LK (2016). Proverb comprehension in individuals with agenesis of the
Author Manuscript

corpus callosum. Brain and Language, 160, 21–29. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2016.07.001 [PubMed:

27448531]
Reuter-Lorenz PA, Stanczak L, & Miller AC (1999). Neural recruitment and cognitive aging: Two
hemispheres are better than one, especially as you age. Psychological Science, 10(6), 494–500.
Sauerwein HC, & Lassonde M (1994). Cognitive and sensori-motor functioning in the absence of the
corpus callosum: neuropsychological studies in callosal agenesis and callosotomized patients.
Behavioural Brain Research, 64(1-2), 229–240. [PubMed: 7840889]
Sauerwein HC, Lassonde M, Cardu B, & Geoffroy G (1981). Interhemispheric integration of sensory
and motor functions in callosal agenesis. Neuropsychologia, 19, 445 – 454. [PubMed: 7266837]

J Int Neuropsychol Soc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 March 24.
 Brown and Paul Page 11

Saul RE, & Sperry RW (1968). Absence of commissurotomy symptoms with agenesis of the corpus
callosum. Neurology, 18, 307.
Author Manuscript

Schell-Apacik CC, Wagner K, Bihler M, Ertl-Wagner B, Heinrich U, Klopocki E, … von Voss H

(2008). Agenesis and dysgenesis of the corpus callosum: clinical, genetic and neuroimaging
findings in a series of 41 patients. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 146A(19), 2501 – 2511.
doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.32476 [PubMed: 18792984]
Schieffer B, Paul LK, & Brown WS (2000). Deficits in complex concept formation in agenesis of the
corpus callosum [Abstract]. Poster presented at the Twenty-Eighth Annual International
Neuropsychological Society Conference: February 9–12, 2000 Denver, Colorado. Journal of the
International Neuropsychological Society, 6(2), 164.
Schieffer B, Paul LK, Schilmoeller K, & Brown WS (2000). Components of intelligence and basic
achievement in agenesis of the corpus callosum [Abstract]. Poster presented at the Twenty-Eighth
Annual International Neuropsychological Society Conference: February 9–12, 2000 Denver,
Colorado. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 6(2), 164.
Solmaz B, Tunc B, Parker D, Whyte J, Hart T, Rabinowitz A, … Verma R (2017). Assessing
connectivity related injury burden in diffuse traumatic brain injury. Human Brain Mapping, 38(6),
Author Manuscript

2913–2922. doi:10.1002/hbm.23561 [PubMed: 28294464]

Solursh LP, Margulies AI, Ashem B, & Stasiak EA (1965). The relationships of agenesis of the corpus
callosum to perception and learning. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 141(2), 180–189.
Sperry RW (1968). Hemisphere deconnection and unity in conscious awareness. American
Psychologist, 25(10), 723–733.
Sperry RW, Gazzaniga M, Bogen J, Vinken PJ, & Bruyn GW (1969). Interhemispheric relationships:
the neocortical commissures; syndromes of hemisphere disconnection. Handbook of Clinical
Neurology (Vol. 4, pp. 273–290).
Symington SH, Paul LK, Symington MF, Ono M, & Brown WS (2010). Social cognition in individuals
with agenesis of the corpus callosum. Social Neuroscience, 5(3), 296–308.
doi:10.1080/17470910903462419 [PubMed: 20162492]
Tang PH, Bartha AI, Norton ME, Barkovich AJ, Sherr EH, & Glenn OA (2009). Agenesis of the
corpus callosum: an MR imaging analysis of associated abnormalities in the fetus. American
Journal of Neuroradiology, 30(2), 257–263. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1331 [PubMed: 18988682]
Turk A, Brown WS, Symingtion M, & Paul LK (2010). Social narratives in agenesis of the corpus
Author Manuscript

callosum: linguistic analysis of the Thematic Apperception Test. Neuropsychologia, 48, 43–50.
doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.08.009 [PubMed: 19686767]
Ubukata S, Ueda K, Sugihara G, Yassin W, Aso T, Fukuyama H, & Murai T (2016). Corpus callosum
pathology as a potential surrogate marker of cognitive impairment in diffuse axonal injury. Journal
of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 28(2), 97–103. doi:10.1176/
appi.neuropsych.15070159
Wahl M, Strominger Z, Jeremy RJ, Barkovich AJ, Wakahiro I, Sherr EH, & Mukherjee P (2009).
Variability of homotopic and heterotopic callosal connectivity in partial agenesis of the corpus
callosum: a 3T diffusion tensor imaging and q-ball tractography study. American Journal of
Neuroradiology, 30(2), 282–289. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1361 [PubMed: 19001538]
Wang LW, Huang CC, & Yeh TF (2004). Major brain lesions detected on sonographic screening of
apparently normal term neonates. Neuroradiology, 46(5), 368–373. doi: 10.1007/
s00234-003-1160-4 [PubMed: 15103432]
Weissman DH, & Banich MT (2000). The cerebral hemispherescooperate to perform complex but not
Author Manuscript

simple tasks. Neuropsychology, 14(1), 41–59. [PubMed: 10674797]

Weissman DH, & Compton RJ (2003). Practice makes a hemisphere perfect: The advantage of
interhemispheric recruitment is eliminated with practice. Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain,
and Cognition, 8(4), 361–375.
Yakovlev PI, Lecours A, & Minkovski A (1967). The myelogenetic cycles of regional maturation of
the brain. Regional Development of the Brain in Early Life (pp. 3–65).
Young CM, Erickson RL, Paul LK, & Brown WS (2013). Academic achievement in children and
adults with agenesis of the corpus callosum. Poster presented at the Forty First Annual Meeting

J Int Neuropsychol Soc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 March 24.
 Brown and Paul Page 12

International Neuropsychological Society February 6–9, 2013 Waikoloa, Hawaii, USA. Journal of
the International Neuropsychological Society, 7P(S1), 44. doi:10.1017/S1355617713000362
Author Manuscript

Young CM, Folsom RC, Paul LK, Su J, Mangum R, & Brown WS (under review). Awareness of
consequences in agenesis of the corpus callosum: semantic analysis of responses.
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript

J Int Neuropsychol Soc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 March 24.
 Brown and Paul Page 13
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript

Figure 1.
Agenesis of the corpus callosum, core syndrome, and specific deficits.
Author Manuscript

J Int Neuropsychol Soc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 March 24.