Before the advent of modern imaging techniques, scientists and clinicians relied on autopsies of people who suffered brain injury with resultant change in behavior to determine how different areas of the brain were affected. what are some of the limitations associated with this kind of approach?

The answer to this question would be that scientists and researchers who depended on visualization of simply the brain that they could extract from the corpses who were diagnosed with some form of behavioral change due to brain injury, could only draw conclusion from what they could see, but they could not understand the true process behind how a brain injury affected the functioning of the brain, as with the simple eye, they could not see the cells, and other structures deep in the organ that played a part in these behavioral changes. Thus, comprehension of how brain injury truly caused, or affected, or even explained, behavioral changes in a person, was very limited and sometimes biased.

Explanation:

Modern imaging techniques have allowed medicine to get to learn about the processes that happen within the brain due to the interaction of the different cells in it, and that are affected when a person suffers a brain injury. Before that, when science depended only on autopsies, meaning, on only having the physical brain of a person affected, they could only rely on what was seen easily with the naked eye. Thus, a lot of misunderstanding on this circumstance generated problems and mistreatment for people with brain injuries, and behavioral changes. Today, this is much better understood, and the event much better treated, thanks to the comprehension of the processes caused by a brain injury.

i r r e l e v a n t

are there actual statements because if not my answer would be: that using the five senses the author can create a sense of worth in an object to appeal to the reader and create meaning.