175th Anniversary of the American Annals of the Deaf: Part III—1961 to the Present Peter V. Paul The editorial for this issue is the third and final rendition of a celebration of the 175th anniversary of the American Annals of the Deaf. In this issue, I cover the period from 1961 to the present. Much as in the editorials in the two previous celebration issues (Paul, 2022a, 2022b), my initial primary focus was on articles covering various aspects of the development of language and literacy. However, here I have strayed from this original emphasis to discuss other interesting, perhaps groundbreaking articles. The time frame covered by this editorial, and by this special Annals issue, has been marked by stark economic and political events in America. These include the Cuban Missile Crisis, the assassinations of John and Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr., the emergence of the counterculture of the 1960s, the Vietnam War, the stock market crash of 1987, and the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan—to name a few. Events that have affected the education and social welfare of individuals of color, those with disabilities, and others include the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, better known as Public Law 94-142 (and subsequently amended several times), the American With Disabilities Act, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. The period since 1961 has also seen the rise of inclusion and the disability rights movement, challenging the utility and effectiveness of special education programs and services and our long-standing perspectives on constructs such as disability and deafness. I could go on—think of the explosive impact of the Internet and the introduction of transformational digital devices (e.g., iPads, iPhones) and social media platforms. Oh yeah, Gallaudet University appointed its first deaf president in 1988. And I was proud to be selected the first deaf editor of the Annals in 2011. Range of topics There was no avoiding the challenge posed by the selection of articles for discussion and the few chosen for reprinting in this issue. Initially, I was intrigued by the titles and quick perusals of 146 articles. This was a smaller number than those I considered for the first celebration issue (194), and much smaller than the total contemplated for the second (338). Looking at issues from 1998 to about 2010, I was captivated by a few of the editorials by the previous Annals editor, Donald F. Moores, covering controversial and interesting topics such as demography (Moores, 2001a), teacher preparation (Moores, 2003), the No Child Left Behind Act (Moores, 2004), and residential schools (Moores, 2009). Several of his editorials on cochlear implants were also of interest (Moores, 2002, 2005, 2008–2009, 2010). Perhaps Moores’s approach and style of writing served as an inspiration for my editorials. [End Page 407] Looking at articles from the inception of my editorship in 2011 to the present, I found it difficult to select articles to read (again!) and discuss or to highlight as reprints. In fact, making selections for the 50 years from 1961 to 2011 was equally difficult because I had read and synthesized a number of articles on a range of topics—such as American Sign Language– English bilingualism, Cued Speech, the developmental differences between deaf children of deaf parents and deaf children of hearing parents, language and literacy development, lipreading/speechreading, signed systems, and vocabulary—in writing my own published works. I hope that some of my readers are familiar with my stances on these issues. Of course, I promise not to say anything more here about the qualitative similarity hypothesis (Wang & Andrews, 2014, 2015). As usual, the Annals contained information on a wide range of topics—not only the above-mentioned cochlear implants (pros and cons!), Cued Speech, inclusion, and digital technology, but also communication and signed systems, instructional television, intelligence (oh, the debates…), internal speech, locus of control, mainstreaming, mathematics, the purpose of science in the curriculum, signed language, speech and hearing issues, Visual Phonics, visual sequential memory, and on and on. Several issues of the Annals provided lists of speech and hearing centers, organizations and associations (National Association of the Deaf, etc...
Selected Topics of Interest, 2001 Issues and Trends in Instruction and Deafness: American Annals of the Deaf 1 336 to 2000 Donald F. Moores, Jerry Jatho, and Bethany Creech This article is dedicated to Bethany Creech. Beth was a graduate student, studying for her M.A. in education of the deaf at Gallaudet University. She was an advisee of Dr. Moores and worked as a graduate assistant with him and Mr. Jatho on this material. She and her grandmother were killed in a tragic automobile accident over Thanksgiving vacation in November of last year. Moores is a professor in the Department of Education, Gallaudet University, Washington DC, and Jatho is a doctoral student in the department. For this article—a review of all instruction -related articles published in the literary issues of the American Annals of the Deaf from 1996 to 2000 (except for literacy-related publications , which are reviewed in the following article)—the authors identified six categories: Teacher/Professional Preparation. Teacher Characteristics, Modes of Instruction/Communication , Content/Curriculum, Placement, and Student Characteristics. Contributions came from authors in If different countries. Results show progress in several areas, but the field is struggling to meet the demands of rapidly changing educational systems. There is a need for more practical information in academic content, educational placement , addressing special needs of deaf children with disabilities, and giving attention to the enormous cultural diversity represented by deaf children in our school programs. Use of technology lags. More attention should be devoted to improving professional opportunities for deaf individuals from the entire spectrum of our society. Introduction The material presented here is part of an effort to analyze articles published in the literary editions of the American Annals of the Deaf from 1996 to 2000. The literary issues are published four times yearly: March, July, October, and December. Of the 130 articles that appeared during that time, approximately half dealt with issues related to instruction. In order to present instruction-related publications efficiently, we concentrate on nonliteracy-related articles here and deal with literacy-related material in the following article in this issue. Because the overviews presented here present only highlights, we strongly recommend that readers interested in any particular article reviewed here return to the original source for details. After considerable discussion, we agreed on six categories for the review: 1. Teacher/Professional Preparation 2. Teacher Characteristics 3. Modes of Instruction/Communication 4. Content/Curriculum 5. Placement 6. Student Characteristics We were interested in the treatment , if any, given to a number of potential issues. Considering the attention in the literature to the perceived growing diversity of the school-age population, we wanted to see if it was addressed in publications in the Annals . Another area of interest was the possible impact of the most recent Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) mandate for access to the general education curriculum. Would there be increased attention to content areas such as math, science, and history? Another area of interest was the response of the field to reports of large numbers of deaf and hard of hearing with disabilities. Categories Teacher/Professional Preparation Within the Teacher Preparation category is the Council for Exceptional Children and National Council on Education of the Deaf Joint KnowJedge and Skills Statement for All Becoming Teachers for Students Who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing (1996). Volume 146, No. 2 AMhRiCAN Annals or the Deal The statement was designed to set standards for use in teacher preparation programs addressing a range of communication and placement options , according to the stated philosophy of each program. The document comprises 66 statements of knowledge and skills needed specific to the education of students who are deaf or hard of hearing. We found only two statements related to content, both in the "knowledge" area: Statement 32 refers to subject matter and practices used in general education, and statement 35 refers to research supporting instructional strategies and practice for teaching students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Not one "skill" statement dealt with the teaching of content , and specific content in science or mathematics was not mentioned. Rittenhouse & Kenyon-Rittenhouse (1997) reported on the responses of first-year teachers to a questionnaire. In general...
Selected Topics of Interest, 2001 Literacy Publications: American Annals of the Deaf 1396 to 2000 Donald F. Moores and Margery S. Miller Moores is a professor in the Department of Education, and Miller, a professor in the Department of Psychology, at Gallaudet University, Washington DC. Twenty articles dealing with literacy published in literary issues of the American Annals of the Deaf from 1996 to 2000 were reviewed. A movement away from the dominant Whole Language approach to a more eclectic , analytic orientation was noted. Drill and practice, written repetition, instruction in the phonological bases of language, use of bridge lists, and reliance on both American Sign Language and English-based signing were featured. Practical implications were discussed. Despite recent advances , generations-old problems in processing syntax continued, regardless of curriculum, mode of instruction , or language used in the classroom . Questions were raised as to the ability of deaf readers to take advantage of progress in captioning if basic barriers to literacy are not resolved . Introduction The authors identified twenty publications related to literacy in the literary issues of the American Annals of the Deaf from 1996 to 2000, or approximately fifteen percent of the total number of articles. Our purpose was to identify areas of literacy that seemed to be of importance to scholars in the field and to identify issues of importance that, in our opinion, might have been neglected. Of particular concern was the extent, if any, of the apparent trends in general education toward phonics and away from Whole Language. Recent attention to the possible phonological bases of reading and the implications for deaf children would seem to be logically related to the apparent reemphasis on phonics in many public schools. Another question of interest was whether there was any indication of significant improvement in the reading and writing skills of deaf children in the past several years. The articles contain contributions from authors from several different countries. Over the past ten years, the Annals has published increasing numbers of articles from countries outside of the United States and Canada and has taken on an international perspective. The issues and trends reviewed here seem to have commonality across countries. As with other categories, we urge the reader to refer to original articles for complete information. Mayer & Akamatsu (2000) examined how American Sign Language (ASL) and signed forms of English might mediate progress in constructing meaning in written texts by deaf children. Children were presented ASL and English-based sign videotaped presentations of fables and were asked to produce written versions . The authors reported that all children understood the fables, and that either ASL or English-based sign was comprehensible. There was no advantage in comprehension for either form of input. In the case of the written aspect of the task, the authors concluded that students who can write in English are thinking in English . One student reported that when she saw a fable in ASL she had to think it in English to write it down. The authors argued that, since ASL has no written form, deaf students cannot acquire literacy skills in ASL as a first language (Ll) to transfer to a second language (L2) such as English, but that English-based signing can be an efficient bridge to literacy. Their final conclusion (p. 400) was "...especially for deaf children of hearing parents, English-based sign would be an appropriate choice for developing Ll." ASL could be either a simultaneous Ll or an L2. Schimmel, Edwards, & Prickett (1999), in an article entitled "Reading? Pah! I got it!", reported on a program at a residential school that incorporated five elements: Volume 146, No. 2 American Annals of the Deaf Literacy Publications, 1996-2000 1. Phonemic Awareness 2. Adapted Dolch Words 3. Bridge Lists 4. Reading Comprehension 5. ASL Development/Language Experience Stories Training in phonemic awareness was designed to develop phonological information related to reading. Children were trained through videotapes and cards to learn Dolch words in context and to connect them with appropriate signs. Bridge lists were developed to train children to sign phrases conceptually rather than word for word. The Multiple Skills R Series was used to teach comprehension and decoding skills. ASL development was...
In 2001 the American Annals of the Deaf published reviews of all literacy-related articles (Moores and Miller, 2001) and all other instruction-related articles (Moores, Jatho, & Creech, 2001) covering 1996 to 2000 inclusively. Twenty articles dealing with literacy were identified. A major trend was a move away from what had been the dominant Whole Language approach to a more eclectic analytic orientation, with added emphasis on drill and practice, written repetition, instruction on phonological bases of language, use of bridge lists, and reliance on both American Sign Language (ASL) and English-based signing. Problems with the processing and production of English syntax remained regardless of curriculum, mode of instruction, and language used in the classroom. Despite the existence of excellent research on captioning, it was problematic for many deaf readers to take advantage of developments if basic barriers to literacy remain. Forty-six articles addressing instruction in non-literacy areas were identified and classified as follows: 1. Teacher/Professional Preparation 2. Teacher Characteristics 3. Modes of Instruction/Communication 4. Content/Curriculum 5. Placement 6. Student Characteristics A major concern was an almost complete lack of attention to content areas. Only three articles over the 5-year period addressed mathematics and there were none for science or social studies instruction. First-year teachers appeared to be satisfied with their training, although there was concern that the field is not preparing professionals to work in itinerant placements. A scarcity of highly trained personnel for faculty and administrative positions was noted, with implications for future programs. Given the numbers of deaf students with overlays of mild, moderate, and severe disabilities, there was inadequate attention devoted to the needs of these children. There was a similar lack of information on addressing the special needs of children identified as having minority identification. As a result of the reviews it was decided that die Annals should make an effort to encourage submission of manuscripts in several areas. First would be a push to have an increase in the number of submissions related to academic content, a difficult undertaking given the centuries-old concentration on reading. This, of course has taken on added importance due to the passage of the No Child Left Behind legislation subsequent to the publication of die reviews mandating access to and success in the general curriculum. Odier critical areas involve the impact of major changes in student characteristics, academic placement, die rapid spread of surgical techniques such as cochlear implants, and the growing diversity of the deaf population. The response to the two articles covering the period from 1996 to 2000 was positive. They provided readers basic information about articles aggregated by category over a 5-year period. Readers could then go on to read appropriate articles for detail. The two reviews included somewhat more than one-half of all of the articles published in the Annals from 1996 to 2000. For this article, covering the seven years from 2001 to 2007, we decided to include all 183 articles in order to present a more complete picture of the journal's publications. Aware that some articles would fit within two or more categories, we nevertheless assigned each article to one of the following descriptors: 1. Instruction 2. Teacher/Professional Characteristics 3. Teacher preparation 4. Social/Social-Emotional 5. Health and Medical 6. Vocational 7. Cultural More than 100 articles fell within the Instruction category, with approximately one-third concerned with literacy. We subdivided Instruction as follows 1. Literacy 2. Communication, Academic Piacement, and Technology 3. Academic Content and Related Academic Content 4. …
The authors provide an overview of 21 articles from several countries focusing on families with deaf members published in the literary issues of the American Annals of the Deaf from 1996 to 2000. Four categories were identified: Interaction and Involvement, Support Services, Stress and Coping, and Decision Making. The articles represent a commendable expansion of focus from the mother-child dyad to increased attention to fathers, siblings, extended family members, and significant nonfamily members such as deaf adults. The heterogeneity of families was a striking factor, even within those studies dealing with relatively homogeneous populations. Services appeared to be most effective within middle-class, educated family units, illustrating the need for more comprehensive services sensitive to the needs of families from less affluent backgrounds and with lower levels of education. In general, services to families with deaf children may be characterized as better than in the past but still in need of significant sensitivity and improvement. The presence of a deaf child in a family with hearing parents may cause stress, but parents have the flexibility to respond in a positive and beneficial way, especially when provided adequate information and support. The idea that hearing parents go through a grieving process involving the identification of deafness in their child seems to be an overstatement.
No AccessJournal of Speech and Hearing DisordersResearch Article1 May 1964The Vowel Formants of Deaf and Normal-Hearing Eleven- to Fourteen-Year-Old Boys Angelo A. Angelocci, George A. Kopp, and Anthony Holbrook Angelo A. Angelocci Google Scholar , George A. Kopp Google Scholar and Anthony Holbrook Google Scholar https://doi.org/10.1044/jshd.2902.156 SectionsAboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationTrack Citations ShareFacebookTwitterLinked In Additional Resources FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited by Humanities and Social Sciences Communications10:129 May 2023Acoustics of long vowels in Arabic-speaking children with hearing impairmentsBassil Mashaqba, Anas Huneety, Nisreen Al-Khawaldeh, Mutasim Al-Deaibes and Zainab Zeidan Jue Yu and Qianwen Jin (2021) Discourse Timing in Children's Rhyme Speech Produced by Prelingually Deaf Mandarin-Speaking Children with Cochlear Implants 2021 24th Conference of the Oriental COCOSDA International Committee for the Co-ordination and Standardisation of Speech Databases and Assessment Techniques (O-COCOSDA)10.1109/O-COCOSDA202152914.2021.9660460978-1-6654-0870-7 Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research64:2 (664-682)17 Feb 2021Vowel Production in Prelingually Deafened Mandarin-Speaking Children With Cochlear ImplantsJing Yang and Li XuAmerican Journal of Speech-Language Pathology29:3 (1749-1778)4 Aug 2020What Acoustic Studies Tell Us About Vowels in Developing and Disordered SpeechRay D. Kent and Carrie Rountrey Acta Otorrinolaringológica Española70:5 (251-257)1 Sep 2019Comparación de la producción vocal en niños con hipoacusia prelocutiva con adaptación audioprotésica e implante coclear con normooyentesFaustino Núñez-Batalla, Gabriela Vasile, Noelia Cartón-Corona, Daniel Pedregal-Mallo, Marta Menéndez de Castro, Maite Guntín García, Justo Gómez-Martínez, Pilar Carro Fernández and Jose Luis Llorente-Pendás Acta Otorrinolaringologica (English Edition)70:5 (251-257)1 Sep 2019Vowel Production in Hearing Impaired Children: A Comparison Between Normal-hearing, Hearing-aided and Cochlear-implanted ChildrenFaustino Núñez-Batalla, Gabriela Vasile, Noelia Cartón-Corona, Daniel Pedregal-Mallo, Marta Menéndez de Castro, Maite Guntín García, Justo Gómez-Martínez, Pilar Carro Fernández and Jose Luis Llorente-Pendás Pajouhan Scientific Journal17:2 (1-6)1 Mar 2019The Relationship between Public Life Quality and the Voice Handicap Index (VHI) in Adults with Different Hearing LossesNegin Moradi, Parvane Rahimifar, Samira Aghadoost, Majid Soltani, Nader Saki and Ehsan Naderi far Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology (1-7)15 Jan 2019Use of formant centralization ratio for vowel impairment detection in normal hearing and different degrees of hearing impairmentEhsan Naderifar, Ali Ghorbani, Negin Moradi and Hossein Ansari Journal of Communication Disorders74 (74-97)1 Jul 2018Static measurements of vowel formant frequencies and bandwidths: A reviewRaymond D. Kent and Houri K. Vorperian Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology10:3 (278-282)1 Sep 2017Differences of the Voice Parameters Between the Population of Different Hearing Tresholds: Findings by Using the Multi-Dimensional Voice ProgramFerit Akil, Umur Yollu, Ozcan Ozturk and Murat Yener Shiraz E-Medical Journal18:714 May 2017Evaluation of Formant Frequencies in Persian Speaking Children with Different Degrees of Hearing LossEhsan Naderifar, Ali Ghorbani, Negin Moradi, Hossein Ansari, Ozra Aghadoost, Faezeh Asadollahpour and Martina Ozbic Journal of Voice30:6 (763.e1-763.e7)1 Nov 2016Acoustic Analysis of Persian Vowels in Cochlear Implant Users: A Comparison With Hearing-impaired Children Using Hearing Aid and Normal-hearing ChildrenNarges Jafari, Fariba Yadegari and Shohreh Jalaie International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology18:4 (378-387)3 Jul 2016Acoustic characteristics of vowels produced by Greek intelligible speakers with profound hearing impairment I: Examination of vowel spaceKaterina Nicolaidis and Anna Sfakianaki Journal of Voice30:3 (340-344)1 May 2016A Comparison of Persian Vowel Production in Hearing-Impaired Children Using a Cochlear Implant and Normal-Hearing ChildrenNarges Jafari, Michael Drinnan, Reyhane Mohamadi, Fariba Yadegari, Mandana Nourbakhsh and Farhad Torabinezhad Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica68:5 (211-215)Voice Handicap Index in Persian Speakers with Various Severities of Hearing LossOzra Aghadoost, Negin Moradi, Payman Dabirmoghaddam, Alireza Aghadoost, Ehsan Naderifar and Siavash Mohammadi Dehbokri Journal of Communication Disorders59 (24-39)1 Jan 2016Hearing impairment and vowel production. A comparison between normally hearing, hearing-aided and cochlear implanted Dutch childrenJo Verhoeven, Oydis Hide, Sven De Maeyer, San Gillis and Steven Gillis The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America138:5 (2791-2799)1 Nov 2015Acoustic properties of vowel production in prelingually deafened Mandarin-speaking children with cochlear implantsJing Yang, Emily Brown, Robert A. Fox and Li Xu Communication Sciences & Disorders20:2 (202-213)30 Jun 2015Nasalance Scores of Normal Hearing Children of Deaf Adults and Normal Hearing Adults: Longitudinal StudyJaeock Kim and Minhee Seo Phonetics and Speech Sciences7:1 (67-77)31 Mar 2015Comparison of Acoustic Characteristics of Vowel and Stops in 3, 4 year-old Normal Hearing Children According to Parents' Deafness: Preliminary StudyJisook Hong, Youngae Kang and Jaeock Kim Lucie Ménard (2015) Multimodal Speech Production The Handbook of Speech Production10.1002/9781118584156.ch103 Mar 2015 (2013) Th e Acoustic Measurement of Vowels Handbook of Vowels and Vowel Disorders10.4324/9780203103890-9 NeuroImage61:1 (314-322)1 May 2012Understanding the neural mechanisms involved in sensory control of voice productionAmy L. Parkinson, Sabina G. Flagmeier, Jordan L. Manes, Charles R. Larson, Bill Rogers and Donald A. Robin World Journal of Clinical Pediatrics1:4 (24)Profound deafness and the acquisition of spoken language in childrenPetros V Vlastarakos Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology5:Suppl 1 (S69)Preoperative Voice Parameters Affect the Postoperative Speech Intelligibility in Patients with Cochlear ImplantationYun Suk An, Seong Tae Kim and Jong Woo Chung Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology5:Suppl 1 (S14)Acoustic Analysis of Speech of Cochlear Implantees and Its ImplicationsAnjali R Kant, Rajesh Patadia, Prajakta Govale, R. Rangasayee and Milind Kirtane European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology268:10 (1437-1442)1 Oct 2011The effect of cochlear implantation and post-operative rehabilitation on acoustic voice analysis in post-lingual hearing impaired adultsSabah M. Hassan, Khalid H. Malki, Tamer A. Mesallam, Mohamad Farahat, Manal Bukhari and Thomas Murry Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics25:8 (689-704)1 Aug 2011Point vowel duration in children with hearing aids and cochlear implants at 4 and 5 years of ageMark Vandam, Dana Ide-Helvie and Mary Pat Moeller Journal of Voice25:2 (e75-e84)1 Mar 2011Formant Frequency Characteristics in Normal Arabic-Speaking JordaniansYaser S. Natour, Basem S. Marie, Mawada A. Saleem and Yacoub K. Tadros Journal of Voice25:2 (e61-e65)1 Mar 2011Objective Voice Analysis of Boys With Profound Hearing LossAli Dehqan and Ronald C. Scherer Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics24:9 (722-733)1 Sep 2010Single word and sentence intelligibility in children with cochlear implantsFadwa A. Khwaileh and Peter Flipsen Deafness & Education International12:2 (99-128)1 Jun 2010Vowel Formant Values in Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Children: A Discriminant AnalysisMartina Ozbič and Damjana Kogovšek The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America125:4 (2299-2306)1 Apr 2009Attenuation of vocal responses to pitch perturbations during Mandarin speechHanjun Liu, Yi Xu and Charles R. Larson Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research52:2 (412-434)1 Apr 2009Role of Visual Speech in Phonological Processing by Children With Hearing LossSusan Jerger, Nancy Tye-Murray and Hervé Abdi Wiener klinische Wochenschrift120:7-8 (228-233)1 Apr 2008The influence of cochlear implantation on vowel articulationDer Einfluss von Cochlearimplantaten auf die Artikulation von VokalenIrena Hocevar-Boltezar, Miha Boltezar and Miha Zargi Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics22:9 (726-740)1 Jan 2008The locus equation as an index of coarticulation in syllables produced by speakers with profound hearing lossHelen McCaffrey Morrison Journal of Voice21:6 (669-682)1 Nov 2007Acoustic Voice Analysis of Prelingually Deaf Adults Before and After Cochlear ImplantationMaegan K. Evans and Dimitar D. Deliyski Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology32:1 (17-22)1 Jan 2007A comparative study of vocal fundamental frequency in the speech of Japanese and American hearing-impaired childrenHiroko Nakamura, Harvey Gilbert and Michael Robb Perceptual and Motor Skills103:1 (40-50)1 Aug 2006Multidimensional Voice Program Analysis in Profoundly Deaf Children: Quantifying Frequency and Amplitude ControlPaolo Campisi, Aaron J. Low, Blake C. Papsin, Richard J. Mount and Robert V. Harrison International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology70:7 (1195-1203)1 Jul 2006Acoustic and perceptual appraisal of speech production in pediatric cochlear implant usersSarah F. Poissant, Kimberly A. Peters and Michael P. Robb Otology & Neurotology27:4 (499-503)1 Jun 2006Change of Phonation Control After Cochlear ImplantationIrena Hocevar-Boltezar, Zora Radsel, Jagoda Vatovec, Branka Geczy, Smilja Cernelc, Anton Gros, Janez Zupancic, Saba Battelino, Bostjan Lavrencak and Miha Zargi Otology & Neurotology27:4 (499-503)1 Jun 2006Change of Phonation Control After Cochlear ImplantationIrena Hocevar-Boltezar, Zora Radsel, Jagoda Vatovec, Branka Geczy, Smilja Cernelc, Anton Gros, Janez Zupancic, Saba Battelino, Bostjan Lavrencak and Miha Zargi Perceptual and Motor Skills103:5 (40)MULTIDIMENSIONAL VOICE PROGRAM ANALYSIS IN PROFOUNDLY DEAF CHILDREN: QUANTIFYING FREQUENCY AND AMPLITUDE CONTROLPAOLO CAMPISI Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics20:9 (691-702)1 Jan 2006Volumetric measurements of vocal tracts for male speakers from different racesSteve An Xue, Grace Jian P. Hao and Robert Mayo Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research48:6 (1334-1343)1 Dec 2005Control of Voice-Onset Time in the Absence of HearingHarlan Lane and Joseph S. Perkell International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology69:12 (1635-1640)1 Dec 2005The influence of cochlear implantation on some voice parametersIrena Hocevar-Boltezar, Jagoda Vatovec, Anton Gros and Miha Zargi International Journal of Audiology44:8 (452-465)1 Jan 2005Comparison of the overall intelligibility, articulation, resonance, and voice characteristics between children using cochlear implants and those using bilateral hearing aids: A pilot studyKristiane M. Van Lierde, Bart M. Vinck, Nele Baudonck, Eddy De Vel and Ingeborg Dhooge Journal of Voice18:2 (209-215)1 Jun 2004Voice field measurements—a new method of examination: the influence of hearing on the human voiceMojmı́r Lejska Journal of Communication Disorders37:3 (275-294)1 May 2004Acoustic and perceptual characteristics of vowels produced during simultaneous communicationNicholas Schiavetti, Dale Evan Metz, Robert L. Whitehead, Shannon Brown, Janie Borges, Sara Rivera and Christine Schultz Ear and Hearing24:Supplement (90S-105S)1 Feb 2003Acoustic Characteristics of the Speech of Young Cochlear Implant Users: A Comparison with Normal-Hearing Age-MatesRosalie M. Uchanski and Ann E. Geers Journal of Multilingual Communication Disorders1:2 (99-114)1 Jan 2003Acoustic comparison of CV syllables in French-speaking children with normal hearing, moderate-to-severe and profound hearing impairmentJACK RYALLS, ANNIE LAROUCHE and FRANCINE GIROUX Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research43:2 (441-455)1 Apr 2000Production of Sentence-Final Intonation Contours by Hearing-Impaired ChildrenGeorge D. Allen and Patricia M. Arndorfer Ear and Hearing19:5 (385-393)1 Oct 1998The Effect of Auditory Feedback on the Control of Oral-Nasal Balance by Pediatric Cochlear Implant UsersMario A. Svirsky, David Jones, Mary J. Osberger and Richard T. Miyamoto Alvirda Farmer (1997) Spectrography Instrumental Clinical Phonetics10.1002/9780470699119.ch21 Jun 1997 Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research37:4 (938-951)1 Aug 1994An Investigation of Vowel Organization in Speakers With Severe and Profound Hearing LossHelen A. McCaffrey and Harvey M. SussmanJournal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research36:5 (1063-1074)1 Oct 1993The Efficacy of Using the IBM Speech Viewer Vowel Accuracy Module to Treat Young Children With Hearing ImpairmentSheila R. Pratt, Anne T. Heintzelman and Susan Ensrud DemingJournal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research36:3 (488-502)1 Jun 1993Vowel and Diphthong Production by Young Users of Cochlear Implants and the Relationship Between the Phonetic Level Evaluation and Spontaneous SpeechNancy Tye-Murray and Karen Iler Kirk Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics7:2 (95-111)1 Jan 1993Acoustic validation of vowel error patterns in developmental apraxia of speechJulie H. Walton and Karen E. Pollock Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research35:3 (574-579)1 Jun 1992Spectral Study of Deviant Resonance in the Speech of Women Who Are DeafJoanne D. Subtelny, Robert L. Whitehead and Vincent J. Samar Journal of Communication Disorders25:2-3 (165-174)1 Apr 1992Acoustic patterns of an adolescent with multiple articulation errorsLinda I. Shuster, Dennis M. Ruscello and Karen B. Haines Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research35:1 (88-95)1 Feb 1992Acoustic Integrity of Speech Production in Children With Moderate and Severe Hearing ImpairmentJohn Ryalls and Annie LaroucheJournal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research35:1 (35-44)1 Feb 1992Comparing Tongue Positioning by Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Children During Vowel ProductionPaul A. Dagenais and Paula Critz-CrosbyJournal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research34:6 (1423-1435)1 Dec 1991Consonant Lingual-Palatal Contacts Produced by Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired ChildrenPaul A. Dagenais and Paula Critz-CrosbyJournal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research34:6 (1286-1292)1 Dec 1991Perseveratory Coarticulation in the Speech of Profoundly Hearing-Impaired and Normally Hearing ChildrenShari R. Baum and Robin S. WaldsteinJournal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research34:6 (1276-1285)1 Dec 1991Anticipatory Coarticulation in the Speech of Profoundly Hearing-Impaired and Normally Hearing ChildrenRobin S. Waldstein and Shari R. BaumJournal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research34:4 (943-956)1 Aug 1991Teaching Vowels to Profoundly Hearing-Impaired Speakers Using GlossometrySamuel G. Fletcher, Paul A. Dagenais and Paula Critz-CrosbyJournal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research34:3 (453-459)1 Jun 1991The Establishment of Open Articulatory Postures by Deaf and Hearing TalkersNancy Tye-Murray Journal of Communication Disorders22:5 (317-325)1 Oct 1989Phonological space in the speech of the hearing impairedR.S. Shukla Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics3:1 (71-80)1 Jan 1989Combining displays of EPG and automatic segmentation of speech for clinical purposesAndrea M. Dew, Nancy Glaister and Peter J. Roach Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology96:3 (322-324)1 May 1987Speaking Fundamental Frequency of Postlingually Profoundly Deaf Adult MenSteven B. Leder, Jaclyn B. Spitzer and J. Cameron Kirchner Journal of Communication Disorders18:4 (259-272)1 Aug 1985Remediation of intonation contours of hearing-impaired studentsMeryl Friedman Revista de Logopedia, Foniatría y Audiología4:1 (37-51)1 Jan 1984Fonética experimental y psicolingüísticaAna María Borzone de Manrique Language and Speech26:3 (233-246)1 Jul 1983Simultaneous Measurements of Vowels Produced by a Hearing-Impaired SpeakerNancy S. Mcgarr and Carole E. Gelfer Journal of Phonetics11:2 (101-115)1 Apr 1983"Compensatory articulation" in hearing impaired speakers: a cinefluorographic studyN. Туе, G.N. Zimmermann and J.A. Scott Kelso Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America16:1 (281-292)1 Feb 1983The Effects of Cochlear Implant Use on Voice ParametersKaren Her Kirk and Bradly J. Edgerton SAMUEL G. FLETCHER (1983) New Prospects for Speech by the Hearing Impaired 10.1016/B978-0-12-608609-6.50007-4 MARY JOE OSBERGER and NANCY S. MCGARR (1982) Speech Production Characteristics of the Hearing Impaired 10.1016/B978-0-12-608608-9.50013-9 D. KIMBROUGH OLLER and REBECCA E. EILERS (1981) A Pragmatic Approach to Phonological Systems of Deaf Speakers 10.1016/B978-0-12-608606-5.50009-0 Journal of Communication Disorders13:6 (419-441)1 Dec 1980The structure of segmental errors in the speech of deaf childrenH. Levitt, H. Stromberg, C. Smith and T. Gold Journal of Communication Disorders13:6 (397-418)1 Dec 1980Speech production in hearing-impaired childrenToni Gold Journal of Communication Disorders11:5 (417-424)1 Sep 1978Improvement in vowel articulation of deaf childrenRandall B. Monsen and Dale H. Shaughnessy Journal of Communication Disorders11:2-3 (293-313)1 Apr 1978The evaluation of a model speech training program for deaf childrenMary Joe Osberger, Andrea Johnstone, Eileen Swarts and Harry Levitt Journal of Communication Disorders11:2-3 (237-247)1 Apr 1978Pitch deviancy and intelligibility of deaf speechNancy S. McGarr and Mary Joe Osberger Journal of Phonetics4:3 (189-198)1 Jul 1976Normal and reduced phonological space: the production of English vowels by deaf adolescentsRandall B. Monsen IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics20:1 (35-41)1 Mar 1972Acoustic analysis of deaf speech using digital processing techniquesH. Levitt IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics20:1 (3-8)1 Mar 1972Status of speech-analyzing communication aids for the deafJ. Pickett IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics20:1 (9-16)1 Mar 1972Tactile pitch displays for the deafT. Willemain and F. Lee Journal of Communication Disorders4:4 (310-316)1 Dec 1971Diagnostic implications of acoustic cry featuresM.Carolyn Jones Richard Luchsinger and Gottfried E. Arnold (1970) Sprachstörungen infolge von Gehörleiden: Audiogene Dyslalie Handbuch der Stimm- und Sprachheilkunde10.1007/978-3-7091-7130-1_16 IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics16:2 (227-234)1 Jun 1968Recent research on speech-analyzing aids for the deafJ. Pickett Review of Educational Research36:1 (176-198)1 Feb 1966Chapter X: The Deaf and the Hard of HearingJoseph Rosenstein Volume 29 Issue 2 May 1964 Pages: 156-170 Get Permissions Add to your Mendeley library History Published in issue: May 1, 1964 PubMed ID: 14147499 Metrics Topicsasha-article-typesCopyright & PermissionsCopyright © 1964 American Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationPDF downloadLoading ...
Volume 14 2, No. 3, 1997 The Influence of Early Manual Communication on the Linguistic Development of Deaf Children E. Ross Stuckless and Jack W. Birch Program in Special Education and PvE HABILITATION, School op Education, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Effective parent/child communication. Gallaudet University Archives. Part I I. Introduction Educators of the deaf for centuries have been preoccupied with the modes of communication in the classroom that will best serve the deaf student's education and general social adjustment. The concern of many has centered on whether a method of instruction that is strongly orientated to vocalization or a method of instruction that leans toward manual communication is most favorable to the deaf student. In brief, are deaf students best served by the "oral" or by the "simultaneous" method? Each position is logically defensible. The one maintains that the handicap is minimized with the attainment of functional speech, speechreading, and acoustic skills; the other maintains that for many students these skills are presently unattainable, so manual communication represents the best alternative. Controversy has centered primarily on the préadolescent and adolescent deaf student. The prevailing recommendation made to parents of the deaf infant and preschool child has been that they communicate orally with their deaf child, primarily to give him an awareness of language and basic vocal communication skills; yet rarely do the skills become highly developed at this age. Five percent or more of deaf children have deaf parents, many of whom routinely communicate manually in the home. The children of such parents acquire manual communication skills very much as the hearing child develReprinted from Stuckless, E. R, and Birch, J. W. (1966). The influence of early manual communication on the linguistic development of deaf children. American Annals of the Deaf, 111(2), 452-460 (part I), 111(3), 499-504 (part II). The research reported herein was supported by a research contract with the Cooperative Research Program of the Office of Education, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Volume 142, No. 3, 1997 American Annals of the Deaf Influence of Early Manual Communication ops vocal communication skills. The effect of the communication system learned by any child, regardless of the communication mode, seems pronounced and permanent. Since manual communication (fingerspelling excepted ) and vocalized language have little congruency, the child who learns manual communication early may have increased difficulty in shifting to the grammar and lexicon of the English language. On the other hand, the deaf child with early manual communication may have an increased awareness of the significance of language and concepts contingent on language, and an increased resource of knowledge and experiences facilitated by communication . Many teachers of the deaf, on the basis of their empirical information, relate the success of some deaf children in written language and reading to the fact that they have deaf parents who communicate manually in the home; the same teachers attribute poor development of speech and speechreading to the same observation. If, in fact, early manual communication influences the development of linguistic skills in deaf children, whether it be in a positive or an inhibiting direction, then the implication is clear that the establishment of a communication system in the deaf child before he enters school is pertinent to the linguistic success manifest while he is in school. The investigators wish to underscore two points at the outset of this report. First, this investigation was not designed to reveal information on the relative pedagogical merits of the various methods of communication employed in educational programs for deaf children. It limits itself to a study of the influence of a particular communication system learned by some deaf children before they enter school. Second, it is recognized that manual communication might not be the only functional communication system a deaf child can learn before entering school. It may be that children can be taught to vocalize and speechread language with such skill that these communication media become highly functional very early in life. Manual communication was isolated as an independent variable because young deaf children do learn this method of communication with reasonable ease and without formal tutoring. The investigators would encourage additional research on subjects who develop...
Volume 142, No. 3, 1997 Psycholinguistics and Deafness Donald F. Moores Assistant Professor, Department of Special Education, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota Valid assessment is the key to educational planning. Gallaudet Center for Studies in Education and Human Development. In the summer of 1967, American educators of the deaf observed two significant milestones. It was a year which commemorated establishment of the first school for the deaf 150 years before in Hartford, Connecticut, and which celebrated the 100th anniversary of the introduction of oral methods of teaching the deaf at the Clarke School for the Deaf and the Lexington School for the Deaf. Although great strides have been made in the education of deaf children in the United States, a variety of problems which have existed since 1817 still continue to plague the field and to resist the efforts of even the most committed and creative teachers. If one could perceive, Janus-like, the past and future, retrospectus and prospectus , the view might be unsettling and could call into question some of our basic beliefs. It is common, in education as well as in other fields, to equate the past with failure, the present with innovation , and the future with success; however , it has been argued1 that, in written language at least, deaf children of 100 years ago were superior to those being graduated or terminated from the schools and programs of today. A reading of compositions of 19th-century deaf students might tend to substantiate such a statement, even though it should be noted that a much higher proportion of students were postverbally deaf then than is the case today. Still, it cannot be denied that results, in the form of academic achievement, leave much to be desired. It has been demonstrated consistently that the educational attainment of deaf children falls far below what might be predicted on the basis of chronological age and/or mental age.2,3 ' A cumulative deficit also has been shown to exist; i.e., the academic retardation of the deaf, relative to the hearing, increases as a function of age due to the tendency for the achievement scores of the deaf to plateau during adolescence.24'5 After a deaf child enters his teens, annual gains are typically measured in terms of tenths of years. The deaf child starts school at a Reprinted from Moores, D. F. of the Deaf, 115(1), 31-48. (1910). Psycholinguistics and deafness. American Annals Volume 142, No. 3, 1997 American Annals of the Deaf disadvantage that is continually expanding and is never overcome. The area in which the deaf child is weakest, and which underlies his deficiency in other areas, is his language ability. Studies of academic achievement of the deaf3-4,6'7 indicate that their lowest scores are earned on Word Meaning and Paragraph Meaning subtests. The median reading achievement score for the deaf at age 16 has been reported to be grade 3-4.8 Other investigators3'5·6 produce somewhat higher figures, but none reach a grade level for any group of 6.0. It has been demonstrated9 that even these low estimates are spuriously inflated because the nature of multiple-choice tests standardized on the hearing is such as to assume a base of linguistic proficiency that most deaf children do not possess. Thus, results paint a gloomy picture which forces educators of the deaf to a choice. We can continue along the same lines that have been set down in the past and face the discouraging prospect of producing disproportionate numbers of intellectually normal yet functionally illiterate deaf adults, or we can begin to reexamine the whole structure of our educational programs and the practical means by which we hope to attain our goals. There exist today large bodies of knowledge and techniques in education and psychology that are of tremendous potential value for the deaf. Programmed instruction, both of a linear , Skinnerian type, and the more sophisticated response-dependent systems approach, come immediately to mind. The investigations of Bruner10 with very young hearing children raise exciting possibilities. In the public schools, the principles of the new math and the developments in linguistic approaches to teaching reading should be readily adaptable...
The purpose of this survey was to determine how many residential and day schools for deaf and hard-of-hearing students in the United States described themselves as bilingual-bicultural (BiBi) programs and to describe characteristics of those programs related to initial implementation, whether a single language (e.g., English or ASL) is promoted as the first language (L1) and the language of instruction for all deaf students, how English is conveyed conversationally to deaf students, the quality of ASL abilities of BiBi instructional and support staff; general characteristics of the curriculum and the specific reading and bicultural components of the curriculum; and characteristics of research being conducted to establish the efficacy of BiBi methods. Ninety-one percent (n = 71) of the 78 day and residential schools listed in the 1998 Directory of the American Annals of the Deaf participated in the survey, with 19 schools identifying themselves as BiBi. These included 16 residential schools and 3 day schools. Depending on the source for numbers of students in residential and day schools at the time of the survey, between 36% and 40% of students were in programs that identified themselves as BiBi. Sixteen of the programs reported becoming a BiBi program between 1989 and 1994 and only three after 1994. Of the 19 programs, 37% reported use of manually coded English (MCE) for conveying English to the students. Fluency in ASL of instructional and support staff varied, with 47% of the programs reporting that no more than half of the instructional staff were fluent in ASL and 68% of the programs reporting that no more than half of the support staff were fluent. Only 21% of the 19 programs reported having a formal BiBi curriculum with annual goals and suggested materials and procedures for teachers. Research implications of these data are discussed.
This longitudinal study investigated the impact of child deafness on mothers' stress, size of social networks, and satisfaction with social support. Twenty-three hearing mothers of deaf children and 23 hearing mothers of hearing children completed a series of self-report questionnaires when their children were 22 months, 3, and 4 years old. When children were 22 months, more mothers of deaf children reported pessimism about their children's achieving self-sufficiency and concerns about their children's communication abilities than did mothers of hearing children. When their children were 3 and 4 years old, mothers of deaf and hearing children did not differ in their reports of general parenting stress, as measured by the Parenting Stress Index (PSI). Likewise, mothers' ratings of satisfaction with social support were not affected by child deafness, nor did they change developmentally. Mothers of deaf and hearing children did differ in the types of support networks utilized. Mothers of deaf 22-month-olds reported significantly larger professional support networks, while mothers of hearing children reported significantly larger general support networks across all child ages. Mothers' feelings of stress and satisfaction with social support were very stable across the 2 years examined. The results suggest that most mothers of deaf children do not feel a high level of general parenting stress or dissatisfaction with their lives and support networks. However, mothers of deaf children are likely to feel stress in areas specific to deafness. In addition, because parenting stress was highly stable, special efforts should be made to intervene when mothers of deaf children are expressing high levels of stress.
Children acquire language without instruction as long as they are regularly and meaningfully engaged with an accessible human language. Today, 80% of children born deaf in the developed world are implanted with cochlear devices that allow some of them access to sound in their early years, which helps them to develop speech. However, because of brain plasticity changes during early childhood, children who have not acquired a first language in the early years might never be completely fluent in any language. If they miss this critical period for exposure to a natural language, their subsequent development of the cognitive activities that rely on a solid first language might be underdeveloped, such as literacy, memory organization, and number manipulation. An alternative to speech-exclusive approaches to language acquisition exists in the use of sign languages such as American Sign Language (ASL), where acquiring a sign language is subject to the same time constraints of spoken language development. Unfortunately, so far, these alternatives are caught up in an "either - or" dilemma, leading to a highly polarized conflict about which system families should choose for their children, with little tolerance for alternatives by either side of the debate and widespread misinformation about the evidence and implications for or against either approach. The success rate with cochlear implants is highly variable. This issue is still debated, and as far as we know, there are no reliable predictors for success with implants. Yet families are often advised not to expose their child to sign language. Here absolute positions based on ideology create pressures for parents that might jeopardize the real developmental needs of deaf children. What we do know is that cochlear implants do not offer accessible language to many deaf children. By the time it is clear that the deaf child is not acquiring spoken language with cochlear devices, it might already be past the critical period, and the child runs the risk of becoming linguistically deprived. Linguistic deprivation constitutes multiple personal harms as well as harms to society (in terms of costs to our medical systems and in loss of potential productive societal participation).
In recent years, empowerment and resource orientation have become vital guidelines for many of the sciences. For the field of deaf education, it is also highly important to look carefully at these guidelines if we are to acquire a better understanding as regards both the situation of the parents involved and the development of the deaf and hard of hearing children themselves. A resource-oriented approach to deaf education has therefore proved especially helpful. If both the theoretical and practical aspects of educating deaf and hard of hearing children are to benefit, research on parental experience with deafness and research on the socioemotional development of the children must always be combined and studied in the context of resource availability. In a study of 213 mothers and 213 fathers of deaf and hard of hearing children, we used an array of different questionnaires (PSI, SDQ, SOC, F-SozU, etc.) to examine the correlation between parental resources, sociodemographic variables, parental stress experience, and child socioemotional problems by way of a path analysis model. The results show that high parental stress is associated with frequent socioemotional problems in the children, thus emphasizing the importance of a resource-oriented consulting and support strategy in early intervention, because parental access to personal and social resources is associated with significantly lower stress experience. Child development seems to profit enormously from a resource-oriented support concept. In addition, the results confirm two earlier findings: parents with additionally handicapped children are especially stressed and the child's communicative competence makes for a more sound prediction than its linguistic medium (spoken language or sign). The path models for mothers and fathers agree in all essential factors. The results are discussed with a view to their meaning for pedagogical practice, and recommendations for further research are given (longitudinal data, more representative samples, cochlear implant).
This research project investigated the relationships between various working memory (WM) recoding processes and English language skills in a sample of 86 prelingually deaf college students from varied educational backgrounds. Part 1 reports the results of a short-term memory (STM) experiment and a Recoding Strategies questionnaire. The STM results suggested that, for most deaf students, neither the speech, sign, or visual codes are as efficient as the speech code of hearing persons for the purpose of maintaining English linguistic information in WM. However, the ability to use speech-based recoding processes was positively correlated with WM capacity, and the use of sign recoding was found to decrease as the ability to make efficient use of a speech recoding strategy increased. In addition, the questionnaire data suggested that neither the speech nor sign recoding systems provide the majority of students with a complete internal representation of English surface structure grammatical information in WM. There was no evidence that the use of sign language in education interfered with the ability to develop a speech recoding strategy, or that knowledge of American Sign Language (ASL) negatively influenced the acquisition of English skills. The overall pattern of results suggested that WM processes and recoding strategies may be influencing grammatical processes, and the acquisition of English skills, in distinctive ways.
This article presents results from an interview study of 45 parents/caregivers (representing 27 families) whose infants were correctly identified as deaf during the first phase of the implementation of the national universal Newborn Hearing Screening Programme in England. Average age of children when parents were interviewed was 25 weeks. Two issues are explored: (a) how parents talk about significance of knowing early that their child is deaf and (b) parents' expectations of their child's development in light of early identification. Although results demonstrate clear support from parents' perspective of knowing early, they also identify the psychological complexities of recognizing both the grief and reassurance that early knowledge brings; the risks of early knowledge-inducing timetables of expectations that create distress when not met speedily; the extent to which parental models of the developmental advantages of early identification are underpinned by notions of normal speech and the possibility of being like hearing children; and the pervasiveness of deficit and illness models associated with having identified deafness early. Implications for parental support and professional responses are also discussed.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the health care utilization of a nationally representative sample of U.S. deaf adults while accounting for the age at onset of deafness, an indicator of linguistic and sociocultural group affiliation. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Data from the 1990 to 1991 National Health Interview Surveys the most recent years the Hearing Supplement was administered. The data were collected during in-home interviews of a sample of the U.S. civilian noninstitutionalized population. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analyses comparing health-related measures of adults deafened before (prelingually) and after (postlingually) the age of 3 and those of a representative sample of the general population, adjusting for sociodemographics and health status. Key measures were physician visits and preventive health care services utilization. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Compared with the general population, prelingually deafened adults had fewer physician visits and were less likely to have visited a physician in the preceding 2 years, whereas postlingually deafened adults had more physician visits and were more likely to have visited a physician in the preceding 2 years. Postlingually deafened women were less likely to have had a mammogram within the previous 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: In terms of health care utilization, the deaf population is heterogeneous. Prelingually deafened adults' use of health care is similar to that of other language minority groups. Postlingually deafened adults' use of health care services appears similar to people with chronic illness. Future studies must distinguish different groups of people with hearing loss in order to identify barriers and monitor improvements in health care services access.
This study examined demographic and clinical data from a specialty deaf inpatient unit so as to better understand characteristics of severely and chronically mentally ill deaf people. The study compares deaf and hearing psychiatric inpatients on demographic variables, psychiatric discharge diagnoses, a language assessment measure, a cognitive ability measure, and a measure of psychosocial functioning and risk of harm to self and others. Overall, findings indicate a broader range of diagnoses than in past studies with posttraumatic stress disorder being the most common diagnosis. Compared with hearing patients in the same hospital, deaf patients were less likely to be diagnosed with a psychotic or substance abuse disorder and more likely to be diagnosed with a mood, anxiety, personality, or developmental disorder. Psychosocial functioning of the deaf patients was generally similar to hearing psychiatric patients. Deaf patients presented significantly higher risks than hearing patients in areas of self-harm and risk of sexual offending. Cognitive scores show that both the deaf and hearing inpatient population is skewed toward persons who are lower functioning. An additional surprising finding was that 75% of deaf individuals fell into the nonfluent range of communication in American Sign Language.
both the grammatical complexity and organizational principles common to the spoken languages of the world For example, unlike English, ASL is morphologically complex and has been compared in typology to polysynthetic spoken languages Unfortunately, for the majority of deaf children, access to either spoken or signed language is extremely limited. Of the approximately 500,000 deaf people who reside in the United States who have difficulty utilizing spoken language, 90% to 94% of them were born to hearing parents who do not know sign language, yet the primary language of the Deaf population is ASL. Thus, unlike children who acquire the language of their parents, most deaf children do not initially have access to a signed language. Given this atypical language learning environment, deaf children of hearing families are clearly at risk for language delay; the need for early language assessment and normative data is critical. Currently, relatively little is known about early lexical and grammatical development in deaf children of deaf parents, who are acquiring ASL as their first language. In response to this need, we have developed the MacArthur Communicative Development Inventory for American Sign Language (ASL-CDI), a parental report based on the English CDI This article reports on the development of this form and preliminary results from the data collection. We discuss both cross-sectional and longitudinal data.
Deafness is more than a medical condition. Recent theories have emphasized the importance of environmental factors on the psychosocial development of deaf children. As part of a larger scale study, this article aims to investigate the impact of the following variables on deaf students' psychosocial adjustment in Turkey: student-related background and experiential characteristics, parent-related variables, school-related factors, and teacher-related variables. The sample of 1,097 deaf students enrolled in the elementary, secondary, and high schools was drawn from 34 schools in 24 cities on a national geographical spread. The multiple regression analysis revealed that degree of hearing loss, additional handicap, and age at onset of deafness were negatively related to psychosocial adjustment of deaf students. However, there was a positive relationship between psychosocial variables and some of the independent variables, such as use of hearing aids, speech intelligibility, academic achievement, parental hearing status, and communication methods used at school. The findings of the study do not support a "pathological" view of deafness, suggesting that it was not deafness per se but that some environmental factors were also influential on the psychosocial adjustment of deaf students.
This paper re-visits Bauman and Murray’s (2014) “Deaf Gain,” using the perspectives of Black Deaf history. Due to the enforcement of the Oral policy in U.S. educational system during 1890s through 1960s, the language transmission of American Sign Language (ASL) for many generations of White Deaf people were fractured (Gannon, 1981). During the segregation, approximately 81.25% of the Black Deaf schools maintained their signed education, which ironically provided better education than the White-only schools. Consequently, the language variation of Black Deaf people in the South, called as “Black ASL” (McCaskill et al., 2011), flourished due to the historical adversity of White Deaf experience. Thus, the sustainability of Black ASL empowered this ethnic group of American Deaf community, which I am re-framing to what I call “Black Deaf Gain” and presenting a different objective of the ontology of Black Deaf experience.
The ability to attribute false beliefs (i.e., demonstrate theory of mind) by 155 deaf children between 5 and 8 years of age was compared to that of 39 hearing children ages 4 to 6. The hypotheses under investigation were (1) that linguistic features of sign language could promote the development of theories of mind and (2) that early exposure to language would allow an easier access to these theories. Deaf children were grouped according to their communication mode and the hearing status of their parents. The results obtained in three false belief tasks supported the hypotheses: effective representational abilities were demonstrated by deaf children of deaf parents, whereas those born to hearing parents appeared delayed in that regard, with differences according to their communication mode.