Aspects of social and psychological adjustment were investigated in a sample of 233 Norwegian adults 20-35 years old with repaired complete cleft lip and palate (CLP); in 126 the cleft was on the left, in 45 on the right, and in 62 it was bilateral. All subjects received a standardised regimen of care from the Oslo cleft palate team. The study, based on response to a questionnaire, partly copied a national survey of social and economic life in the Norwegian population. Adults with complete clefts were compared with a large control sample of the same age. The purpose of this paper is to describe the occurrence of common psychological problems among subjects with CLP. Anxiety, depression, and palpitations were reported about twice as often by subjects with CLP compared with controls, and these psychological problems were strongly associated with concerns about appearance, dentition, speech, and desire for further treatment. These findings suggest that there is an impaired level of psychological wellbeing among subgroups of subjects with clefts.

Aspects of social and psychological adjustment were investigated in a sample of 233 Norwegian adults 20-35 years old with repaired complete cleft of the lip and palate (CLP); in 126 the cleft was on the left, in 45 on the right, and in 62 it was bilateral. All subjects received a standardised regimen of care from the Oslo cleft palate team. The investigation, based on response to a questionnaire, partly replicated a national survey of social and economic life in the population, so that adults with complete clefts could be compared with a large control sample of the same age. This report covers education, employment, and marriage. The results confirm previous findings that there are few differences in educational attainment and employment between adults with CLP and other people. Fewer with CLP marry, and when they marry they do so later in life, particularly if the CLP is bilateral. Income seemed to be lower among married men and single women with CLP than among the control population.

No abstract

A new way of classifying tasks and problems used in studies with deaf people is presented. It is claimed that this classification system allows for the specification of tasks on which deaf people perform equally well as hearing people and of tasks on which they fail in comparison. The classification system is based on certain routines of steps which a subject is required to follow to show his/her understanding of the solution of nonverbal problems. These routines are identified by focusing on the very minimum of data needed by a person outside the experimental situation to decide whether a subject has shown his or her understanding of the solution of a problem. Deaf and hearing people perform equally well when required to show their understanding by referring to one of two such minimum data. The deaf perform worse when required to refer to both of two such data. It seems likely that the difficulties met by the deaf represent a fundamental communication problem which has its roots in the way the deaf are taught or trained.

Previous factor analyses of the Wechsler scales have supported a two-factor (WPPSI and WPPSI-R) and three-factor solution (WISC-R). The present paper explores the validity of a four-factor model across these three instruments. The four-factor model maintains Wechsler's original distinction between verbal and nonverbal domains but distinguishes between “knowledge dependent” and “processing dependent” factors within each domain. Four separate LISREL maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analyses were performed on the WPPSI, WPPSI-R, and WISC-R standardization samples. A best-fitting model was determined by comparing the present four-factor model to the traditional two-factor model that distinguished between Verbal and Performance and a three-factor model that parallels the WISCR factor structure. The new four-factor model resulted in a significant improvement of fit compared to both the two-factor and three-factor models across the three samples. The clinical validity of the model was examined by analyzing the profile patterns of language-impaired children (N = 198) tested with the WPPSI and reading-impaired children (N= 230) tested with the WISC-R. Because processing-dependent tests require more mapping than knowledge-dependent tests, the pattern “knowledge dependent” > “processing dependent” is predicted. This pattern was confirmed in both samples.