Syntactic Processing of Text Reading for People Who are Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing: Qualitative or Quantitative Difference?

Wang Yang; Wu Yan

doi:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240104

PDF(381 KB)

Journal of Psychological Science ›› 2024, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (1) : 28-35. DOI: 10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240104

General Psychology, Experimental Psychology & Ergonomics

Syntactic Processing of Text Reading for People Who are Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing: Qualitative or Quantitative Difference?

Wang Yang^1,2, Wu Yan^1,3

Author information +

History +

Abstract

Text-reading ability is required for people who are deaf and hard-of-hearing to access external information and integrate into society. However, the reading comprehension scores of deaf readers are lower than those of hearing readers. After high school graduation, the average reading comprehension levels of deaf readers are comparable to those of hearing readers in the fourth grade of primary school. According to the results of the language proficiency test, the syntactic awareness deficit is one of the reasons for the reading difficulties of deaf readers. Syntactic awareness contributes more to the reading comprehension of deaf readers than other linguistic or non-linguistic factors.
Nevertheless, it is unclear whether the deficit in syntactic awareness may affect the syntactic processing and whether deaf readers have access to syntactic information when reading text. Currently, two distinct perspectives exist. First, there is a qualitative difference in syntactic processing between deaf readers and hearing readers. Syntactic violations in sentences have not elicited a P600 effect for deaf readers. In contrast, only the N400 effect accurately predicted their reading performance. This study has revealed that deaf readers have neglected syntactic information and prioritized semantic information for comprehension. The second perspective is a quantitative difference whereby deaf readers activate syntactic information automatically, yet it takes them longer and is less accurate. Despite the uncertainty over whether the syntactic processing of deaf readers has undergone a qualitative or quantitative change, it is indisputable that the sentence processing speed and accuracy of deaf readers are lower than those of hearing readers as a result of the impairment of their syntactic processing ability.
What would this difference occur? The word processing efficiency hypothesis in previous studies has suggested that deaf readers show improvement in visual compensation due to their hearing loss, thereby increasing their perceptual span. Deaf readers can process semantic information, such as orthography, more quickly, which can impede syntactic processing. What is the extent of compensation provided by the visual area and other brain areas? Findings reveal that individual differences, such as prior experience with sign language and working memory capacity, influence the syntactic processing of deaf readers.
Future research is expected to focus on the syntactic processing mechanisms in deaf readers from four directions. First, it can investigate the neural basis of deaf readers' syntactic processing at the space-time level from the perspective of brain function compensation. Second, for the experimental design, future studies could choose a paradigm that is more suitable for speech impairment and Chinese characteristics. Third, regarding individual differences, it is essential to examine the effect of oral experience on executive functioning. Lastly, it should create sign bilingualism and co-enrollment environments and control groups that are suitable for interventions.

Key words

deaf and hard-of-hearing people / text reading / syntactic processing / the qualitative-quantitative difference / individual difference

Cite this article

EndNote

Ris (Procite)

Bibtex

Download Citations

Wang Yang, Wu Yan. Syntactic Processing of Text Reading for People Who are Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing: Qualitative or Quantitative Difference?[J]. Journal of Psychological Science. 2024, 47(1): 28-35 https://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240104

References

[1] 邓慧兰. (2014). 聋童语言获得与手语双语共融教育: 语言科学研究之知识转移. 语言科学, 13(1), 24-33.
[2] 方俊明, 雷江华. (2015). 特殊儿童心理学. 北京大学出版社.
[3] 何文广, 张晓靓. (2016). 句法歧义消解影响因素、认知机制及其神经基础. 心理科学, 39(4), 881-886.
[4] 黄伯荣, 廖序东. (2017). 现代汉语 . 高等教育出版社.
[5] 史蒂芬·平克. (2015). 语言本能: 人类语言进化的奥秘 (欧阳明亮译). 浙江人民出版社.
[6] 张宁生, 黄丽娇. (2000). 双语教学及其对中国聋校语言教学的影响. 中国特殊教育, 1, 58-60.
[7] Akçakaya H., Jayakody D. M. P., & Doğan M. (2022). Systematic review and meta-analysis of STM and WM in long-term CI users. Contemporary School Psychology, 27(1), 61-80.
[8] Antia S. D., Lederberg A. R., Easterbrooks S., Schick B., Branum-Martin L., Connor C. M., & Webb M. Y. (2020). Language and reading progress of young deaf and hard-of-hearing children. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 25(3), 334-350.
[9] Barajas C., González-Cuenca A. M., & Carrero F. (2016). Comprehension of texts by deaf elementary school students: The role of grammatical understanding. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 59, 8-23.
[10] Bélanger, N. N., & Rayner, K. (2015). What eye movements reveal about deaf readers. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(3), 220-226.
[11] Bonna K., Finc K., Zimmermann M., Bola L., Mostowski P., Szul M., & Szwed M. (2021). Early deafness leads to re-shaping of functional connectivity beyond the auditory cortex. Brain Imaging and Behavior, 15(3), 1469-1482.
[12] Branigan, H. P., & Pickering, M. J. (2017). An experimental approach to linguistic representation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, Article e282.
[13] Breadmore H. L., Krott A., & Olson A. C. (2014). Agreeing to disagree: Deaf and hearing children’s awareness of subject-verb number agreement. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(3), 474-498.
[14] Çizmeci, H., & Çiprut, A. (2019). Evaluation of the reading and writing skills of children with cochlear implants. The Journal of International Advanced Otology, 14(3), 359-364.
[15] Domínguez A. B., Carrillo M. S., del Mar Pérez M., & Alegría J. (2014). Analysis of reading strategies in deaf adults as a function of their language and meta-phonological skills. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 35(7), 1439-1456.
[16] Ducas K. D., da S. Senra Filho, A. C., Silva P. H. R., Secchinato K. F., Leoni R. F., & Santos A. C. (2021). Functional and structural brain connectivity in congenital deafness. Brain Structure and Function, 226(4), 1323-1333.
[17] Emmorey K., Borinstein H. B., Thompson R., & Gollan T. H. (2008). Bimodal bilingualism. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11(1), 43-61.
[18] Ferreira F., Bailey K. G. D., & Ferraro V. (2002). Good-enough representations in language comprehension. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(1), 11-15.
[19] Figueroa M., Silvestre N., & Darbra S. (2022). Specific EF-related tasks and reading in adolescents with typical hearing or a cochlear Implant. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 43(3), 152-162.
[20] Friederici, A. D. (2002). Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(2), 78-84.
[21] Friedman, N. P., & Miyake, A. (2017). Unity and diversity of executive functions: Individual differences as a window on cognitive structure. Cortex, 86, 186-204.
[22] Gómez-Merino N., Fajardo I., & Ferrer A. (2021). Did the three little pigs frighten the wolf? How deaf readers use lexical and syntactic cues to comprehend sentences. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 112, Article 103908.
[23] Gómez-Merino N., Fajardo I., Ferrer A., & Arfé B. (2020). Time-course of grammatical processing in deaf readers: An eye-movement study. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 25(3), 351-364.
[24] Harris M., Terlektsi E., & Kyle F. E. (2017). Concurrent and longitudinal predictors of reading for deaf and hearing children in primary school. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 22(2), 233-242.
[25] Holmer E., Schönström K., & Andin J. (2022). Associations between sign language skills and resting-state functional connectivity in deaf early signers. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 738866.
[26] Kelly, L. (1996). The interaction of syntactic competence and vocabulary during reading by deaf students. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 1(1), 75-90.
[27] Lee Y., Sung J. E., & Sim H. (2018). Passive sentence comprehension difficulties and its related factors in children with cochlear implants. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 109, 60-66.
[28] Mayer, C., & Trezek, B. J. (2018). Literacy outcomes in deaf students with cochlear implants: Current state of the knowledge. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 23(1), 1-16.
[29] Mehravari A. S., Emmorey K., Prat C. S., Klarman L., & Osterhout L. (2017). Brain-based individual difference measures of reading skill in deaf and hearing adults. Neuropsychologia, 101, 153-168.
[30] Miller, P. (2010). Phonological, orthographic, and syntactic awareness and their relation to reading comprehension in prelingually deaf individuals: What can we learn from skilled readers? Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 22(6), 549-580.
[31] Miller P., Kargin T., Guldenoglu B., Rathmann C., Kubus O., Hauser P., & Spurgeon E. (2012). Factors distinguishing skilled and less skilled deaf readers: Evidence from four orthographies. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 17(4), 439-462.
[32] Neville H. J., Mills D. L., & Lawson D. S. (1992). Fractionating language: Different neural subsystems with different sensitive periods. Cerebral Cortex, 2(3), 244-258.
[33] Paul, P. V. (2021). The qualitative similarity hypothesis: A commentary. Journal Human Research in Rehabilitation, 11(2), 56-61.
[34] Peng P., Barnes M., Wang C. C., Wang W., Li S., Swanson H. L., & Tao S. (2018). A meta-analysis on the relation between reading and working memory. Psychological Bulletin, 144(1), 48-76.
[35] Pimperton H., Blythe H., Kreppner J., Mahon M., Peacock J. L., Stevenson J., & Kennedy C. R. (2016). The impact of universal newborn hearing screening on long-term literacy outcomes: A prospective cohort study. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 101(1), 9-15.
[36] Piñar P., Carlson M. T., Morford J. P., & Dussias P. E. (2016). Bilingual deaf readers’ use of semantic and syntactic cues in the processing of English relative clauses. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20(5), 980-998.
[37] Pooresmaeil E., Mohamadi R., Ghorbani A., & Kamali M. (2019). The relationship between comprehension of syntax and reading comprehension in cochlear implanted and hearing children. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 121, 114-119.
[38] Qi, S., & Mitchell, R. E. (2012). Large-scale academic achievement testing of deaf and hard-of-hearing students: Past, present, and future. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 17(1), 1-18.
[39] Rönnberg J., Lunner T., Zekveld A., Sörqvist P., Danielsson H., Lyxell B., & Rudner M. (2013). The ease of language understanding (ELU) model: Theoretical, empirical, and clinical advances. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 7, Article 31.
[40] Schouwenaars A., Finke M., Hendriks P., & Ruigendijk E. (2019). Which questions do children with cochlear implants understand? An eye-tracking study. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 62(2), 387-409.
[41] Skotara N., Salden U., Kügow M., Hänel-Faulhaber B., & Röder B. (2012). The influence of language deprivation in early childhood on L2 processing: An ERP comparison of deaf native signers and deaf signers with a delayed language acquisition. BMC Neuroscience, 13, Article 44.
[42] Smith G. N. L., Pisoni D. B., & Kronenberger W. G. (2019). High-variability sentence recognition in long-term cochlear implant users: Associations with rapid phonological coding and executive functioning. Ear and Hearing, 40(5), 1149-1161.
[43] Sun Z. H., Shi Y. J., Guo P., Yang Y. M., & Zhu Z. D. (2021). Independent syntactic representation identified in left front-temporal cortex during Chinese sentence comprehension. Brain and Language, 214, Article 104907.
[44] Szterman, R., & Friedmann, N. (2020). The effect of syntactic impairment on errors in reading aloud: Text reading and comprehension of deaf and hard of hearing children. Brain Sciences, 10(11), Article 896.
[45] Takahashi N., Isaka Y., Yamamoto T., & Nakamura T. (2017). Vocabulary and grammar differences between deaf and hearing students. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 22(1), 88-104.
[46] Traxler, C. B. (2000). The Stanford achievement test, 9th edition: National norming and performance standards for deaf and hard-of-hearing students. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5(4), 337-348.
[47] Traxler, M. J. (2014). Trends in syntactic parsing: Anticipation, Bayesian estimation, and good-enough parsing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(11), 605-611.
[48] Traxler M. J., Banh T., Craft M. M., Winsler K., Brothers T. A., Hoversten L. J., & Corina D. P. (2021). Word skipping in deaf and hearing bilinguals: Cognitive control over eye movements remains with increased perceptual span. Applied Psycholinguistics, 42(3), 601-630.
[49] Traxler M. J., Corina D. P., Morford J. P., Hafer S., Hoversten, L. J. & NSF Science of Learning Center for Visual Language & Visual Learning (VL2). (2014). Deaf readers’ response to syntactic complexity: Evidence from self-paced reading. Memory and Cognition, 42(1), 97-111.
[50] Trettenbrein P. C., Papitto G., Friederici A. D., & Zaccarella E. (2021). Functional neuroanatomy of language without speech: An ALE meta-analysis of sign language. Human Brain Mapping, 42(3), 699-712.
[51] Tunmer W. E., Herriman M. L., & Nesdale A. R. (1988). Metalinguistic abilities and beginning reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 23(2), 134-158.
[52] Yan, J. Q., & Li, D. G. (2019). Deaf and hard of hearing students' understanding of causal and adversative connectives in sentence reading. American Annals of the Deaf, 163(5), 554-573.
[53] Yang S. Q., Cai Y. Y., Xie W., & Jiang M. H. (2021). Semantic and syntactic processing during comprehension: ERP evidence from Chinese QING structure. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 15, Article 701923.
[54] Zhao, Y., & Wu, X. C. (2022). Predicting reading fluency in Chinese deaf and hard of hearing students: Contributions of character recognition, expressive vocabulary, and syntactic awareness. American Annals of the Deaf, 166(5), 663-680.