ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
1
Appropriate cognitive assessments for deaf children-Theory of Mind, Executive
Functioning and memory skills.
Tanya Denmark
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Deaf cognition
Cognitive assessments have been developed for users of spoken languages they are often not appropriate for deaf children.
Deaf and hearing children have different knowledge, cognitive strategies and experiences
Deaf signers use a different modality, often acquired outside the normal timeframe for language acquisition
90%+ hearing parents-Language delay can cause cognitive difficulties
Some organic causes of deafness (eg prematurity, rubella, meningitis) lead to further cognitive difficulties.
2
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Differences not impairments
Deaf children who use sign language often show above average performance on visuospatial tasks (Mayberry, 2002)
They are faster at redirecting their visual attention from one location to another (Parasnis & Samar, 1985)
They have greater attention to peripheral stimuli (Bavelier et al., 2000)
They have advantages in face discrimination and mental rotation tasks (Bettger et al. 1997, Emmorey, 1998)
Native signers (DOD) consistently do better than non native (DOD) and are more comparable to hearing groups. This reinforces the relationship between language and cognition.
3
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Theory of Mind
4
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Theory of mind
ToM develops at about 4 years of age in typical hearing children.
ToM involves understanding others’ mental states, behaviours and intentions.
Many ToM assessments/standard tests of false belief reasoning require rather sophisticated language skills and deaf children may not understand the task
Shick et al (2007) tested 176 children aged 3-8 on ToM Children either used ASL or were oral, Doh and Dod
5
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Standard false belief tasks
The unexpected contents task (Perner, Leekam & Wimmer, 1987) The false belief questions in this task contain mental state verbs,
embedded clauses, and if/then statements.
6
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Standard false belief tasks
The change-in-location task (Wimmer & Perner,1983),
Even though the question is simpler, the child needs some linguistic and narrative sophistication in order to follow the story in the first place.
7
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Shick found a significant delay in Doh, regardless of ASL or oral and type of task. Dod performed identically to same-aged hearing controls.
DoH have delayed ToM due to language delay and lack of access to conversations
8
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
BSL ToM tasks
Woolfe, Want & Siegal (2003) Two thought-picture tasks in BSL for
DoD.
Gave children pictures boy with his fishing rod who has caught
a boot. To pass these tasks, children had to
respond correctly to questions about the reality and belief. If both reality and belief questions were answered correctly, the child scored 1 point for each picture, giving a score from 0 to 2.
9
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Eyetracking method younger preverbal (Meristo et al)
10
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
11
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Memory
12
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Deaf Memory
Deaf children have poorer sequential memory (Hall & Bavelier, 2010)
Signs take up more space in working memory. Any memory tasks which involve signing lists or words will take
deaf signers longer and may lead to shorter spans.
Deaf signers are less affected by backward recall on digit span tasks (Bavelier et al., 2000)
13
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Visual form of digit span14
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Spatial span working memory15
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
16
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Executive Function
17
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Executive functions (EF)
fluency
switching
inhibition planning
working memory
fluency
switching working memory
inhibition planning
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
BRIEF-teacher and parent forms
86 item quick checklist of child’s behaviour at school and home Rate behaviours as: never, sometimes, often Teacher Loses lunch box, lunch money, permission slips, homework etc. Parent Has trouble coming up with ideas for what to do in play or free time Acts wilder or sillier than others in groups (birthday parties, playtime)
19
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Deaf EF Deaf children (signing, oral and CI) impaired on BRIEF compared to age-
matched hearing children(Figueras et al, 2008, Pisoni et al, 2008, Conrad et al, 2007, Conway et al., 2007, Hauser et al, 2006.)
Higher levels of impulsivity in oral deaf children using BRIEF (Parasnis et al, 2003)
One or two behavioural measures of EF have previously been used- card sorting task and colour trails (Hauser et al, 2006)
Figueras et al (2008) language development and EF highly related in oral deaf 8-12 year olds
Deaf children with Deaf Parents have better EF abilities than those with hearing parents (Harris, 1978, Oberg, 2007, Hauser et al (2007,2008)
20
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Deaf EF
How is it assessed? Often measures are English based or sound based, or responses
are not comparable for deaf and hearing children
Important to use measures where hearing and deaf children can respond in similar ways- i.e. not compare sign and spoken reaction times but button press responses.
We have used a number of measures which we feel are appropriate for comparing deaf and hearing groups across different modalities.
21
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
22
Time 1 Time 2 (2 years later)
Deaf (oral, SSE, BSL) 6-11 N= 120 (40 6-7, 8-9, 10-11)Hearing 6-11 N= 90 (30 6-7, 8-9, 10-11)
Deaf (oral, SSE, BSL) 7-11 N= 120 (40 7-8, 9-10, 11) Hearing 7-11 N= 90 (30 7-8, 9-10, 11)
Executive Function measures Executive Function measures
Language measures Language measures
We aim to collect data from 200+ children using a battery of different EF tasks and different groups
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Nonverbal: Pictures Test (Davidson et al., 2006)Test of Inhibition
- congruent
- incongruent
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Design fluency
Make as many
different patterns in
1 minute
Correct designs,
repetitions and errors
are scored.
24
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Colour Trails Test-switching25
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Colour Trails Test-switching26
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Tower-planning
1-5 discs gets harder per item Participants must make the end-
point pictured in each item Responses are timed, excess
moves counted
27
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
28
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Other measures
Language Narrative-BSL test of production (Herman et al., 2004). Vocabulary measure- Expressive one word picture vocabulary
test (Martin & Brownell, 2010) Parent/teacher checklist-LPP2 (Bebko & McKinnon, 1993) covers
form, content, reference, cohesion and use-works as a screen.
Non language measures Symbol search- processing speed Non verbal ability-Matrix reasoning
29
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Parent questionnaire
Born/became deaf Cause of deafness Language preference at school/home Cochlear implants/hearing aids Other home languages Level of deafness Family deafness/ family communication School type
Plus many more important background variables...
30
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Findings to date-hot off the press!
Tested 82 children to date aged between 6-11 49 deaf 33 hearing Language and EF measures work well across modalities and age groups
for deaf and hearing children.
We have found some indication that language and EF are related in BSL users to date... Need to check other groups e.g. nonsigners.
We are starting to get some normative data about different groups of deaf children on EF measures which can be used in the future.
31
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Non verbal methods
Non verbal measures are optimal for assessing deaf children
It is important to have additional suitable verbal measures too in sign language these are lacking in research
Verbal measures often give a greater predictive power to academic success and a greater overview of child’s ability.
32
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Tests
Ensure tests are not at ceiling or floor
Change presentation format- visual images, signs or pictures rather than oral or English written words
Allow for more time
Use an array of different suitable tests not just one test to get an overview.
33
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Recommendations
Use the child’s preferred language, all assessors should be trained in language and culture of the child.
Look at child’s full developmental history and background carefully-hearing loss severity and aetiology, preferred language, age of onset, amplification etc.
Receive input from informants across contexts: teacher, parents get broad overview.
Need formal and informal assessments, select assessment tools carefully
Ensure you are trained in administration, scoring and interpretation of assessment
34
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Recommendations
Be mindful of deaf multi disability issue
Ensure the same instructions are given to different groups e.g. deaf oral and deaf signers
Limit visual distractions/ quiet room
Film assessments so you can check them and score again later
Get a 2nd scorer- preferably blind scorer, seek feedback from deaf professionals
Be wary of tests normed on hearing children
Lot to consider but without assessments we have no norms
35
ESRC Deafness Cognition and Language Research Centre
Thank you Questions?
36