Are Deaf Students Visual Learners?

Verbal and visual serial-order memory in deaf signers and hearing nonsigners: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Previous research suggests Deaf signers may have different short-term and working memory processes compared with hearing nonsigners due to prolonged auditory deprivation. The direction and magnitude of these reported differences, however, are variable and dependent on memory modality (e.g., visual, verbal), stimulus type, and research design. These discrepancies have made consensus difficult to reach which, in turn, slows progress in areas such as education, medical decision-making, and cognitive sciences. The present systematic review and meta-analysis included 35 studies (N = 1,701 participants) that examined verbal (n = 15), visuospatial (n = 10), or both verbal and visuospatial (n = 10) serial-memory tasks comparing nonimplanted, Deaf signers to hearing nonsigners across the life span. Multivariate meta-analyses indicated a significant, negative effect of deafness on verbal short-term memory (forward recall), g = -1.33, SE = 0.17, p < .001, 95% CI [-1.68, -0.98], and working memory (backward recall), g = -0.66, SE = 0.11, p < .001, 95% CI [-0.89, -0.45], but no significant effect of deafness on visuospatial short-term memory, g = -0.055, SE = 0.17, p = 0.75, 95% CI [-0.39, 0.28]. Visuospatial working memory was not analyzed due to limited power. Population estimates for verbal and visuospatial short-term memory were moderated by age wherein studies with adults demonstrated a stronger hearing advantage than studies with children/adolescents. Quality estimates indicated most studies were of fair quality, with only 38% of studies involving Deaf authors. Findings are discussed in the context of both Deaf equity and models of serial memory.

Small number enumeration processes of deaf or hard-of-hearing students: A study using eye tracking and artificial intelligence

Students who are deaf or hard-of-hearing (DHH) often show significant difficulties in learning mathematics. Previous studies have reported that students who are DHH lag several years behind in their mathematical development compared to hearing students. As possible reasons, limited learning opportunities due to a lesser incidental exposure to numerical ideas, delays in language and speech development, and further idiosyncratic difficulties of students who are DHH are discussed; however, early mathematical skills and their role in mathematical difficulties of students who are DHH are not explored sufficiently. In this study, we investigate whether students who are DHH differ from hearing students in their ability to enumerate small sets (1–9)—an ability that is associated with mathematical difficulties and their emergence. Based on a study with N = 63 who are DHH and N = 164 hearing students from third to fifth grade attempting 36 tasks, we used eye tracking, the recording of students' eye movements, to qualitatively investigate student enumeration processes. To reduce the effort of qualitative analysis of around 8,000 student enumeration processes (227 students x 36 tasks), we used Artificial Intelligence, in particular, a clustering algorithm, to identify student enumeration processes from the heatmaps of student gaze distributions. Based on the clustering, we found that gaze distributions of students who are DHH and students with normal hearing differed significantly on a group level, indicating differences in enumeration processes, with students who are DHH using advantageous processes (e.g., enumeration “at a glance”) more often than hearing students. The results indicate that students who are DHH do not lag behind in small number enumeration as compared to hearing students but, rather, appear to perform better than their hearing peers in small number enumeration processes, as well as when conceptual knowledge about the part-whole relationship is involved. Our study suggests that the mathematical difficulties of students who are DHH are not related to difficulties in the small number enumeration, which offers interesting perspectives for further research.

Working Memory for Faces among Individuals with Congenital Deafness

BACKGROUND

 Studies examining face processing among individuals with congenital deafness show inconsistent results that are often accounted for by sign language skill. However, working memory for faces as an aspect of face processing has not yet been examined in congenital deafness.

PURPOSE

 To explore working memory for faces among individuals with congenital deafness who are skilled in sign language.

RESEARCH DESIGN

 A quasi-experimental study of individuals with congenital deafness and a control group.

STUDY SAMPLE

 Sixteen individuals with congenital deafness who are skilled in sign language and 18 participants with intact hearing, matched for age, and education.

INTERVENTION

 The participants performed two conditions of the N-back test in ascending difficulty (i.e., 1-back and 2-back).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

 Levene's and Shapiro-Wilk tests were used to assess group homoscedasticity and normality, respectively. A two-way repeated measures analysis of variance was applied to compare the groups in response time and accuracy of the N-back test, as well as Pearson correlation between response time and accuracy, and sign language skill duration.

RESULTS

 The congenital deafness group performed better than controls, as was found in the response time but not in the accuracy variables. However, an interaction effect showed that this pattern was significant for the 1-back but not for the 2-back condition in the response time but not the accuracy. Further, there was a marginal effect in response time but a significant one in accuracy showing the 2-back was performed worse than the 1-back. No significant correlation was found between response time and accuracy, and sign language skill duration.

CONCLUSION

 Face processing advantage associated with congenital deafness is dependent on cognitive load, but sign language duration does not affect this trend. In addition, response time and accuracy are not equally sensitive to performance differences in the N-back test.

Visuospatial and Tactile Working Memory in Individuals with Congenital Deafness

Studies examining visuospatial working memory (WM) in individuals with congenital deafness have yielded inconsistent results, and tactile WM has rarely been examined. The current study examined WM span tasks in the two modalities among 20 individuals with congenital deafness and 20 participants with typical hearing. The congenital deafness group had longer forward and backward spans than typical hearing participants in a computerized Corsi block-tapping test (Visuospatial Span), whereas no such difference was found in the Tactual Span (tactile WM). In the congenital deafness group, age of sign language acquisition was not correlated with either condition of the visuospatial task, and Tactual and Visuospatial Spans scores were correlated in the backward but not the forward condition. The typical hearing group showed no correlation between the tasks. The findings suggest that early deafness leads to visuospatial but not tactile superiority in WM, specifically with respect to the storage component. More broadly, it appears that deafness-related compensation mechanisms in WM do not affect the other modalities in a uniform manner.

Cognitive functioning in Deaf children using Cochlear implants

Background

Cognitive abilities like language, memory, reasoning, visualization, and perceptual functioning shape human action and are considered critical to the successful interaction with the environment. Alternatively, hearing loss can disrupt a child’s ability to communicate, and negatively impact cognitive development. Cochlear implants (CI) restore auditory input thereby supporting communication and may enhance cognitive performance. This study compares general cognitive development after cochlear implantation (2017–2019) in two groups of Jordanian children implanted earlier (age:4–6 years, N = 22) and later (7–9 years, N = 16) to the development of randomly selected normal hearing peers (N = 48).

Design

Visualization, reasoning, memory, and attention were assessed using the Leiter-R scale at baseline (before implantation), 8 months and 16 months post implantation for children with hearing loss. Same times of testing (baseline, 8 months and 16 months) were used for normal hearing peers.

Results

Over the 16-month period, the cognitive improvement of 4–6-year-old deaf children was greater than that of their normal hearing peers on the scales of visualization (5.62 vs. 4.40), reasoning (2.53 vs. 2.38) and memory (17.19 vs. 11.67). while the improvement of 7–9-year-old was less major than that of their normal hearing peers on all scales.

Conclusions

These results suggest that CI not only enhances communication skills but may improve cognitive functioning in deaf children. However, the extent of this improvement was dependent on age at intervention; current results demonstrated that the children received CI at young ages had better cognitive improvements.

Classification of Visual and Non-visual Learners Using Electroencephalographic Alpha and Gamma Activities

This study analyzes the learning styles of subjects based on their electroencephalo-graphy (EEG) signals. The goal is to identify how the EEG features of a visual learner differ from those of a non-visual learner. The idea is to measure the students' EEGs during the resting states (eyes open and eyes closed conditions) and when performing learning tasks. For this purpose, 34 healthy subjects are recruited. The subjects have no background knowledge of the animated learning content. The subjects are shown the animated learning content in a video format. The experiment consists of two sessions and each session comprises two parts: (1) Learning task: the subjects are shown the animated learning content for an 8-10 min duration. (2) Memory retrieval task The EEG signals are measured during the leaning task and memory retrieval task in two sessions. The retention time for the first session was 30 min, and 2 months for the second session. The analysis is performed for the EEG measured during the memory retrieval tasks. The study characterizes and differentiates the visual learners from the non-visual learners considering the extracted EEG features, such as the power spectral density (PSD), power spectral entropy (PSE), and discrete wavelet transform (DWT). The PSD and DWT features are analyzed. The EEG PSD and DWT features are computed for the recorded EEG in the alpha and gamma frequency bands over 128 scalp sites. The alpha and gamma frequency band for frontal, occipital, and parietal regions are analyzed as these regions are activated during learning. The extracted PSD and DWT features are then reduced to 8 and 15 optimum features using principal component analysis (PCA). The optimum features are then used as an input to the k-nearest neighbor (k-NN) classifier using the Mahalanobis distance metric, with 10-fold cross validation and support vector machine (SVM) classifier using linear kernel, with 10-fold cross validation. The classification results showed 97% and 94% accuracies rate for the first session and 96% and 93% accuracies for the second session in the alpha and gamma bands for the visual learners and non-visual learners, respectively, for k-NN classifier for PSD features and 68% and 100% accuracies rate for first session and 100% accuracies rate for second session for DWT features using k-NN classifier for the second session in the alpha and gamma band. For PSD features 97% and 96% accuracies rate for the first session, 100% and 95% accuracies rate for second session using SVM classifier and 79% and 82% accuracy for first session and 56% and 74% accuracy for second session for DWT features using SVM classifier. The results showed that the PSDs in the alpha and gamma bands represent distinct and stable EEG signatures for visual learners and non-visual learners during the retrieval of the learned contents.

Numerical and Real-World Estimation Abilities of Deaf and Hearing College Students

Various studies have examined possible loci of deaf learners' documented challenges with regard to reading, usually focusing on language-related factors. Deaf students also frequently struggle in mathematics and science, but fewer studies have examined possible reasons for those difficulties. The present study examined numerical and non-numerical (real-world) estimation skills among deaf and hearing college students, together with several cognitive abilities likely to underlie mathematics performance. Drawing on claims in the literature and some limited evidence from research involving deaf children, the study also considered the possibility that the use of sign language and/or the use of cochlear implants and spoken language might facilitate deaf college students' estimation skills and mathematics achievement more broadly. Results indicated relatively little impact of cochlear implant use or language modality on either estimation skills or overall mathematics ability. Predictors of those abilities differed for deaf and hearing learners. Results suggest the need to guard against overgeneralisations either within the diverse population of deaf learners or between deaf and hearing learners. They further emphasise the need for evidence-based practice in mathematics instruction appropriate for older deaf learners, rather than making assumptions from studies involving younger or narrowly-selected samples.

Don't Assume Deaf Students are Visual Learners

In the education of deaf learners, from primary school to postsecondary settings, it frequently is suggested that deaf students are visual learners. That assumption appears to be based on the visual nature of signed languages-used by some but not all deaf individuals-and the fact that with greater hearing losses, deaf students will rely relatively more on vision than audition. However, the questions of whether individuals with hearing loss are more likely to be visual learners than verbal learners or more likely than hearing peers to be visual learners have not been empirically explored. Several recent studies, in fact, have indicated that hearing learners typically perform as well or better than deaf learners on a variety of visual-spatial tasks. The present study used two standardized instruments to examine learning styles among college deaf students who primarily rely on sign language or spoken language and their hearing peers. The visual-verbal dimension was of particular interest. Consistent with recent indirect findings, results indicated that deaf students are no more likely than hearing students to be visual learners and are no stronger in their visual skills and habits than their verbal skills and habits, nor are deaf students' visual orientations associated with sign language skills. The results clearly have specific implications for the educating of deaf learners.

Effects of Hearing Status and Sign Language Use on Working Memory

Deaf individuals have been found to score lower than hearing individuals across a variety of memory tasks involving both verbal and nonverbal stimuli, particularly those requiring retention of serial order. Deaf individuals who are native signers, meanwhile, have been found to score higher on visual-spatial memory tasks than on verbal-sequential tasks and higher on some visual-spatial tasks than hearing nonsigners. However, hearing status and preferred language modality (signed or spoken) frequently are confounded in such studies. That situation is resolved in the present study by including deaf students who use spoken language and sign language interpreting students (hearing signers) as well as deaf signers and hearing nonsigners. Three complex memory span tasks revealed overall advantages for hearing signers and nonsigners over both deaf signers and deaf nonsigners on 2 tasks involving memory for verbal stimuli (letters). There were no differences among the groups on the task involving visual-spatial stimuli. The results are consistent with and extend recent findings concerning the effects of hearing status and language on memory and are discussed in terms of language modality, hearing status, and cognitive abilities among deaf and hearing individuals.

Understanding Language, Hearing Status, and Visual-Spatial Skills

It is frequently assumed that deaf individuals have superior visual-spatial abilities relative to hearing peers and thus, in educational settings, they are often considered visual learners. There is some empirical evidence to support the former assumption, although it is inconsistent, and apparently none to support the latter. Three experiments examined visual-spatial and related cognitive abilities among deaf individuals who varied in their preferred language modality and use of cochlear implants (CIs) and hearing individuals who varied in their sign language skills. Sign language and spoken language assessments accompanied tasks involving visual-spatial processing, working memory, nonverbal logical reasoning, and executive function. Results were consistent with other recent studies indicating no generalized visual-spatial advantage for deaf individuals and suggested that their performance in that domain may be linked to the strength of their preferred language skills regardless of modality. Hearing individuals performed more strongly than deaf individuals on several visual-spatial and self-reported executive functioning measures, regardless of sign language skills or use of CIs. Findings are inconsistent with assumptions that deaf individuals are visual learners or are superior to hearing individuals across a broad range of visual-spatial tasks. Further, performance of deaf and hearing individuals on the same visual-spatial tasks was associated with differing cognitive abilities, suggesting that different cognitive processes may be involved in visual-spatial processing in these groups.

Efeitos de oficinas de contar histórias com livros infantis realizadas com familiares de crianças surdas

Resumo:OBJETIVO:analisar os efeitos nas estratégias utilizadas por familiares de crianças surdas ao contar história por meio de livros infantis, antes e depois de oficinas com fonoaudiólogo.MÉTODOS:pesquisa exploratória, qualitativa e descritiva. Foi desenvolvida com familiares que frequentavam uma clínica escola de uma universidade pública federal. No primeiro momento deste estudo foram analisados os prontuários dos pacientes. No segundo foi realizada a gravação em vídeo da díade familiar-criança surda enquanto contava histórias com livros infantis. No terceiro os familiares participaram de oficinas com fonoaudiólogo, envolvendo temas sobre brincar e contar histórias. Após as oficinas, foram realizadas novas gravações em vídeo das díades contando histórias. Os dados foram transcritos e submetidos à análise de vídeo, bem como computado a frequência do número de direção de olhares.RESULTADOS:participaram do estudo três adultos e três crianças. Após as oficinas houve modificações significativas nas estratégias utilizadas pelos familiares ao contar histórias. Empregaram variação da entonação; usaram onomatopeias; recursos corporais como expressões faciais, movimentos, toques na criança e destacaram as ilustrações. Com relação à direção do olhar, após as oficinas as crianças olham mais para o livro e ambos passaram a olhar mais uns para os outros.CONCLUSÃO:após as oficinas observaram-se mudanças qualitativas na maneira de contar histórias, utilizando-se livros infantis como mediadores da interação linguística, por parte dos familiares participantes deste estudo. Os efeitos produzidos proporcionaram uma participação mais produtiva da díade para o desenvolvimento de linguagem das crianças.

Who is where? Characteristics of deaf and hard-of-hearing students in regular and special schools

To address the needs and abilities of deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) students in different educational settings, it is important to understand who is in which setting. A secondary analysis of the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2 database was conducted to examine differences in the characteristics of students who attended special schools, such as schools for the deaf, and those who attended regular schools serving a wide variety of students, such as neighborhood, alternative, and charter schools. The study included a nationally (U.S.) representative sample of about 870 DHH secondary school students. Findings from parent interviews and surveys revealed that students who attended only special secondary schools had greater levels of hearing loss, were more likely to use sign language, had more trouble speaking and conversing with others, and were more likely to have low functional mental scores than students who had attended only regular secondary schools. There were no differences in the presence of additional disabilities or cochlear implants between students in the different settings. In many ways, student characteristics did not vary by school type, suggesting that both types of secondary schools serve students with a wide range of needs and abilities.