ABSTRACT
The emergence of the Quantified Process Approach (QPA, Poreh, 2000) reflects a growing recognition that the qualitative observations and anecdotes of patient performance on standardized neuropsychological measures, as delineated by the Boston Process Approach (BPA), cannot be unified into a solid database. Furthermore, it is unclear as to whether the clinical predictions of the BPA can be empirically supported (Hebben & Milberg, 2002) given the absence of precise norms, clearly spelled out blueprint of how and when these procedures should be used, and tremendous variations in the interpretation of its findings. It should be stressed, however, that in spite of the shortcomings of the qualitative approach, its basic thesis, as outlined by Hans Werner and Edith Kaplan that different cognitive processes are used by different individuals to solve the same problem, remains valid and of paramount importance. Indeed, this thesis and the experience obtained using the BPA are important building blocks for development of the QPA. It is also recognized that in order to fully understand the nature and cause of a given patient's neurocognitive deficits, these processes must be discerned and associated with state-of-the-art functional brain imaging studies.
