The Development of Spoken Language in Deaf Children: Explaining the Unexplained Variance

Musselman, Carol; Kircaali-Iftar, Gonul

doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.deafed.a014285

Cited by 22 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This attitude will no doubt empower the parents and facilitate support structures for the families (Bortoli & Bynes, 2002;Young & Tattersall, 2007). Musselman and Kircaali-Iftar (1996) hypothesised that children with advanced spoken skills have parents who view deafness in their child as a challenge and accept it, whereas children with low spoken skills have parents who view deafness as a difference to be accommodated. DesGeorges (2003) noted that the end point of the so-called 'adjustment' to having a deaf child is not acceptance, but positive action in the form of advocacy for both the child and family.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What We Can Learn From Hearing Parents of Deaf Children

Flaherty

2015

Australas. j. spec. educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hearing parents of deaf children face stresses and demands related to parenting a deaf child, including difficult choices about language, technologies, education and identity for their children (Marschark, 1997). To date, few researchers have discussed the unique challenges faced by this group. Through a series of semistructured, in-depth interviews with 18 parents, this study investigated the experiences of hearing parents of deaf children spanning various life stages. A phenomenological approach identified 5 themes most pertinent to understanding their experiences. Each theme offers insight, particularly for professionals, into the distinctive issues that might arise at the time of diagnosis of deafness and reveals the challenges hearing parents face when confronted with a barrage of decisions, including choice of oral or sign language, mainstream or special deaf education, and identity with the hearing or Deaf community. The central message from this work is to inform hearing parents of deaf children and professionals working with these parents of the likely challenges that they may face.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What We Can Learn From Hearing Parents of Deaf Children

Flaherty

2015

Australas. j. spec. educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Evidence across a variety of studies indicates that significant disruptions may occur in parent–child interactions among hearing mothers of infants and toddlers with SNHL (Meadow-Orlans et al 1997; Musselman and Kircaali-Iftar 1996; Quittner et al 1990; Quittner et al 2010). Observational studies have shown that, relative to mothers in either hearing or deaf dyads, hearing mothers of deaf children tend to be more controlling in their verbal and nonverbal interactions (Musselman and Churchill 1991), spend less time in coordinated joint attention with the child (Waxman et al 1996), and have greater difficulty responding to the child’s emotional and behavioral cues (Swisher 2010).…”

Section: Multivariable Analyses Of Language Learning After Early Cochmentioning

confidence: 99%

Language development after cochlear implantation: an epigenetic model

Markman¹,

Quittner

Eisenberg

et al. 2011

J Neurodevelop Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Growing evidence supports the notion that dynamic gene expression, subject to epigenetic control, organizes multiple influences to enable a child to learn to listen and to talk. Here, we review neurobiological and genetic influences on spoken language development in the context of results of a longitudinal trial of cochlear implantation of young children with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss in the Childhood Development after Cochlear Implantation study. We specifically examine the results of cochlear implantation in participants who were congenitally deaf (N = 116). Prior to intervention, these participants were subject to naturally imposed constraints in sensory (acoustic–phonologic) inputs during critical phases of development when spoken language skills are typically achieved rapidly. Their candidacy for a cochlear implant was prompted by delays (n = 20) or an essential absence of spoken language acquisition (n = 96). Observations thus present an opportunity to evaluate the impact of factors that influence the emergence of spoken language, particularly in the context of hearing restoration in sensitive periods for language acquisition. Outcomes demonstrate considerable variation in spoken language learning, although significant advantages exist for the congenitally deaf children implanted prior to 18 months of age. While age at implantation carries high predictive value in forecasting performance on measures of spoken language, several factors show significant association, particularly those related to parent–child interactions. Importantly, the significance of environmental variables in their predictive value for language development varies with age at implantation. These observations are considered in the context of an epigenetic model in which dynamic genomic expression can modulate aspects of auditory learning, offering insights into factors that can influence a child’s acquisition of spoken language after cochlear implantation. Increased understanding of these interactions could lead to targeted interventions that interact with the epigenome to influence language outcomes with intervention, particularly in periods in which development is subject to time-sensitive experience.

show abstract

“…All children with hearing loss who participated in the current study were receiving intervention focused on the spoken communication modality: 4 were receiving auditory-verbal therapy and 1 was receiving auditory-oral therapy. Both types of intervention place considerable emphasis on attending to the auditory signal, which encourages active listening through a variety of strategies like acoustic highlighting and the use of parentese (Geers, Nicholas, & Sedey, 2003;Musselman & Kirkcaali-Iftar, 1996). As success on the JSR and EVDT requires that listeners pay close attention to specific aspects of the auditory signal, an intervention focused on audition may benefit children with hearing aids faced with these tasks.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%