This article briefly surveys the interdisciplinary field of neuroscience and psychoanalysis (“neuropsychoanalysis”) and also addresses some of the criticisms that the field has encountered. First, the article reviews the historical foundations of neuropsychoanalysis, including both theoretical and technical questions of whether an interdiscipline is appropriate. Second, it discusses the philosophical foundations of the field, including the position of dual-aspect monism. Third, the article examines the scientific foundations, with a discussion of whether analytic work with neurological patients represents an optimal point of contact between the disciplines. Finally, the article engages with the issue of what neuropsychoanalysis is not, covering issues such as “speculation versus empirical research,” and the question of whether neuropsychoanalysis represents a new “school” of psychoanalysis.

The key role of emotion in complex decision-making is commonly assessed using the Iowa Gambling Task, and has recently been a substantial research topic in neuropsychology. However, the question of subjective experience on such emotion-based learning measures has yet to be fully investigated, largely because previous studies have focussed primarily on behavioral performance measures. The present study investigated subjective experience on the Gambling Task, using a more systematic and quantitative method than that previously employed: evaluating the ability of participants to ‘interrogate’ emotion-based learning systems. The study also investigated subjective experience in a population (people with schizophrenia) in whom the question of emotional awareness is of especial interest. People with schizophrenia showed learning on the Gambling Task at levels entirely comparable with that of controls. Both groups of participants also showed substantial, and rapidly developing, awareness of which decks were 'good...

Accounts of anosognosia for hemiplegia have long suggested some implicit knowledge of deficit, where lack of awareness is driven by the emotionally-aversive consequences of bringing deficit-related thoughts to consciousness. The present study investigates this issue using an attentional-capture paradigm, presenting words associated with hemiplegia-related deficit. As anticipated, non-anosognosics showed reduced latencies (i.e., facilitation) for emotionally threatening words. In striking contrast, anosognosics showed increased latencies (i.e., interference), a finding which supports the claim of implicit awareness. The effect appears to be due to newly-learned associations to disability-related words: where anosognosics show a pattern of performance previously described as repression.