Is Reading Different for Deaf Individuals?: Reexamining the Role of Phonology

Mayer, Connie; Trezek, Beverly J.

doi:10.1353/aad.2014.0032

Cited by 38 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 103 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Others have recently argued that phonology does not play a central role in the development or maintenance of skilled reading for deaf people (Mayberry, del Guidice, & Lieberman, 2010; Miller & Clark, 2011). Mayer and Trezek (2014) maintain that interpreting this current research as suggesting a lack of importance for phonology is flawed because these studies were conducted with deaf readers who had not achieved reading success – perhaps because they had not developed strong phonological skills. To address some of these issues, the current study specifically targeted skilled adult deaf readers who are matched on reading level with their hearing peers, with both groups exhibiting a similar range of reading ability.…”

mentioning

confidence: 91%

The N170 ERP component differs in laterality, distribution, and association with continuous reading measures for deaf and hearing readers

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The temporo-occipitally distributed N170 ERP component is hypothesized to reflect print-tuning in skilled readers. This study investigated whether skilled deaf and hearing readers (matched on reading ability, but not phonological awareness) exhibit similar N170 patterns, given their distinct experiences learning to read. Thirty-two deaf and 32 hearing adults viewed words and symbol strings in a familiarity judgment task. In the N170 epoch (120–240 ms) hearing readers produced greater negativity for words than symbols at left hemisphere (LH) temporo-parietal and occipital sites, while deaf readers only showed this asymmetry at occipital sites. Linear mixed effects regression was used to examine the influence of continuous measures of reading, spelling and phonological skills on the N170 (120–240ms). For deaf readers, better reading ability was associated with a larger N170 over the right hemisphere (RH), but for hearing readers better reading ability was associated with a smaller RH N170. Better spelling ability was related to larger occipital N170s in deaf readers, but this relationship was weak in hearing readers. Better phonological awareness was associated with smaller N170s in the LH for hearing readers, but this association was weaker and in the RH for deaf readers. The results support the phonological mapping hypothesis for a left-lateralized temporo-parietal N170 in hearing readers and indicate that skilled reading is characterized by distinct patterns of neural tuning to print in deaf and hearing adults.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 91%

The N170 ERP component differs in laterality, distribution, and association with continuous reading measures for deaf and hearing readers

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To improve the potential for all deaf individuals to read well, we must determine what allows some to become proficient readers, while many others struggle (Mayberry et al, 2011). Though there have been decades of research on the causes of reading difficulty in deaf individuals, conflicting results prevent a clear consensus (Allen et al, 2009; Mayberry et al, 2011; Mayer and Trezek, 2014; Paul et al., 2009). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The overarching question in this debate has been, do deaf children read in the same ways as hearing children, albeit with reduced access to sound, or do they read in qualitatively different ways (Hanson, 1989; Mayer and Trezek, 2014; Perfetti and Sandak, 2000; Wang et al, 2008; Wang and Williams, 2014)? The answer has profound implications for education; if deaf children read proficiently in different ways from hearing children, they may learn best in different ways as well.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brain-based individual difference measures of reading skill in deaf and hearing adults

Mehravari

Emmorey

Prat³

et al. 2017

Neuropsychologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most deaf children and adults struggle to read, but some deaf individuals do become highly proficient readers. There is disagreement about the specific causes of reading difficulty in the deaf population, and consequently, disagreement about the effectiveness of different strategies for teaching reading to deaf children. Much of the disagreement surrounds the question of whether deaf children read in similar or different ways as hearing children. In this study, we begin to answer this question by using real-time measures of neural language processing to assess if deaf and hearing adults read proficiently in similar or different ways. Hearing and deaf adults read English sentences with semantic, grammatical, and simultaneous semantic/grammatical errors while event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded. The magnitude of individuals’ ERP responses was compared to their standardized reading comprehension test scores, and potentially confounding variables like years of education, speechreading skill, and language background of deaf participants were controlled for. The best deaf readers had the largest N400 responses to semantic errors in sentences, while the best hearing readers had the largest P600 responses to grammatical errors in sentences. These results indicate that equally proficient hearing and deaf adults process written language in different ways, suggesting there is little reason to assume that literacy education should necessarily be the same for hearing and deaf children. The results also show that the most successful deaf readers focus on semantic information while reading, which suggests aspects of education that may promote improved literacy in the deaf population.

show abstract

“…V kontexte vzťahu fonologických zručností a začiatočného vyučovania čítania si V. Hanson (1989, In Mayer -Trezek, 2014) už pred štvrťstoročím kládla otázku, či je čítanie nepočujúcich odlišné od počujúcich jedincov. V. Hanson zastáva názor, že odpoveď je áno aj nie.…”

Section: Obrázok 2: Model Sprostredkovaného Prístupu K Lexikónu (Prosunclassified

“…o rýmovanie, čítanie pseudoslov; 2. fonologické zručnosti nepočujúcich detí korelujú s inými meraniami začiatočnej gramotnosti (napr. slovná zásoba, identifikácia slova), ktoré vykazujú podobné počujúcim čitateľom rovnakého veku; 3. po druhom roku vyučovania čítania sa vývinová dráha čítania nepočujúcich rozdeľuje a v čítaní nepočujúcich začína absentovať fonologická citlivosť; 4. medzi znalosťou posunkovej reči, zahŕňajúcej hláskovanie prstami, a výsledkami v čítaní sa nezistila korelácia; 5. včasné vystavenie komunikačnému systému, ktorý robí dostupným fonologické aspekty jazyka, má za následok rozvoj zručností vhodných veku v oblasti fonologického uvedomovania, čítania, hláskovania, ale nevedie nevyhnutne k rozvoju slovnej zásoby (Mayer -Trezek, 2014 Obrázok 3: Duálny model dvoch ciest (k autonómnemu a funkčnému lexikónu) (Zapotocna, 2012) Výskumy ukazujú, že skúsení čitatelia vykazujú dlhší reakčný čas pri hlasnom čítaní neobvyklých slov, ktoré sa neriadia pravidlami hláskovania v porovnaní s bežnými slovami. Pri prezentovaní neobvyklého slova sa aktivujú obe cesty, lexikálna aj fonologická, ale generujú konfliktnú informáciu, vyriešenie na ktorej potrebuje čitateľ dlhší čas.…”

Section: Obrázok 2: Model Sprostredkovaného Prístupu K Lexikónu (Prosunclassified

Visual and Phonological Processes in Reading in the Context of Written Word Comprehension

Máčajová¹,

Grofčíková²,

Mendelova³

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A submitted theoretical study is an output from the national project VEGA no. 1/0637/16 titled Development of a Diagnostic Tool to Assess the Level of Phonemic Awareness of Children in Preschool Age.The main goal of the study is to present basic approaches to the issue how a child gets access to the lexicon (vocabulary). There is discussed impact of visual and phonological processes in reading. In that context, two basic models of approach to lexicon are described. First one is direct access model which considers word and its form, not grapheme as a base of reading. Second, phonological transmission model discusses necessity of so called "phonological route". It is supposed that meaning of a word is transmitted indirectly from orthographic form to the phonological structure.Key words word meaning, lexicon, visual (orthographic) level, phonological level, semantic level, direct access model, phonological transmission model, deaf learners Abstrakt Predkladaná štúdia teoretického charakteru, ktorá predstavuje výstup z riešenia projektu VEGA č. 1/0637/16 s názvom Vývoj diagnostického nástroja na hodnotenie úrovne fonematického uvedomovania u detí v predškolskom veku, má za cieľ prezentovať základné prístupy k otázke, akou cestou dieťa získava prístup k lexikónu. Štúdia uvažuje o podiele vizuálnych a fonologických procesov v čítaní. V tomto kontexte popisuje základné modely prístupu k lexikónu. Prvým je model priameho prístupu k lexikónu, ktorý predpokladá, že základom čítania nie je graféma, ale slovo a jeho tvar. Druhý model, nepriameho prístupu k lexikónu, uvažuje o nevyhnutnosti "fonologickej cesty". Tento predpokladá, že k významu slova sa dieťa dostáva nepriamo -transformáciou ortografického zápisu slova do fonologickej štruktúry.Kľúčové slová význam slova, lexikón, vizuálna (ortografická) úroveň, zvuková (fonologická) úroveň, významová (sémantická) úroveň, model priameho prístupu k lexikónu, fonologická cesta k lexikónu, nepočujúci žiaci Úvod Počiatky systematického výskumu čítania sa spájajú s pomerne intenzívnym záujmom o zrakovo-percepčné alebo zrakovo-priestorové procesy v čítaní. Pochybnosti o tom, že čítame primárne zrakom, začali narastať až začiatkom 70. rokov 20.storočia, najmä v súvislosti s pribúdajúcimi poznatkami o význame fonologických schopností v čítaní. Mnohé výskumy totiž ukázali, že uvedomovanie si fonologickej štruktúry hovorenej reči, rozlišovanie fonologických jednotiek (slov, slabík, morfém a najmä foném) vrátane schopnosti efektívneho narábania s nimi na úrovni operačnej pamäti, je

show abstract

Is Reading Different for Deaf Individuals?: Reexamining the Role of Phonology

Cited by 38 publications

References 103 publications

The N170 ERP component differs in laterality, distribution, and association with continuous reading measures for deaf and hearing readers

The N170 ERP component differs in laterality, distribution, and association with continuous reading measures for deaf and hearing readers

Brain-based individual difference measures of reading skill in deaf and hearing adults

Visual and Phonological Processes in Reading in the Context of Written Word Comprehension

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About