Multiple Literacies for Individuals who are Blind or with Visual Impairment: A Quantitative Comparison on Print, Braille, and Auditory Literacies

Ye Wang, S. Al-Said, Feifei Ye
{"title":"Multiple Literacies for Individuals who are Blind or with Visual Impairment: A Quantitative Comparison on Print, Braille, and Auditory Literacies","authors":"Ye Wang, S. Al-Said, Feifei Ye","doi":"10.4172/2469-9837.1000193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The use of Braille by individuals who are blind or with visual impairment (VI) is often referred to as default, although the social dynamics of this population is not always intimately entwined with Braille. This study is a quantitative comparison on Braille literacy and auditory literacy to investigate if these two forms of captured information are equivalent to each other. Fifteen college graduates between the ages of 22 and 55 participated in the study: 5 of them were blind or with VI and preferred the use of Braille to access text material; 5 of them were blind or with VI and preferred to process textual material through audition; and 5 of them were individuals without VI and preferred to access textual material through visual print. The results showed that there were no differences among the three groups in their recall of propositions from the texts based upon their preferred method of accessing print (Braille, audition, or print), or in their recall of propositions from the text after having listened to an auditory rendition of an equivalent text. When the scores on the two tasks were compared with each other for individuals, there were no differences for either group of individuals who were blind or with VI, but the group of individuals without VI did better on recalling propositions when they read as opposed to when they listened to the text. Empirical suggestions for a more inclusive definition of literacy are provided to empower individuals with blindness and VI as well as other disabilities.","PeriodicalId":439866,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of School and Cognitive Psychology","volume":"118 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of School and Cognitive Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4172/2469-9837.1000193","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The use of Braille by individuals who are blind or with visual impairment (VI) is often referred to as default, although the social dynamics of this population is not always intimately entwined with Braille. This study is a quantitative comparison on Braille literacy and auditory literacy to investigate if these two forms of captured information are equivalent to each other. Fifteen college graduates between the ages of 22 and 55 participated in the study: 5 of them were blind or with VI and preferred the use of Braille to access text material; 5 of them were blind or with VI and preferred to process textual material through audition; and 5 of them were individuals without VI and preferred to access textual material through visual print. The results showed that there were no differences among the three groups in their recall of propositions from the texts based upon their preferred method of accessing print (Braille, audition, or print), or in their recall of propositions from the text after having listened to an auditory rendition of an equivalent text. When the scores on the two tasks were compared with each other for individuals, there were no differences for either group of individuals who were blind or with VI, but the group of individuals without VI did better on recalling propositions when they read as opposed to when they listened to the text. Empirical suggestions for a more inclusive definition of literacy are provided to empower individuals with blindness and VI as well as other disabilities.
盲人或视障人士的多重读写能力:对印刷、盲文和听觉读写能力的定量比较
盲人或有视力障碍(VI)的人使用盲文通常被认为是默认的,尽管这类人群的社会动态并不总是与盲文紧密相连。本研究通过对盲文读写能力和听觉读写能力的定量比较,探讨这两种形式的信息获取是否等同。15名年龄在22岁至55岁之间的大学毕业生参与了这项研究:其中5名是盲人或患有VI,他们更喜欢使用盲文来获取文本材料;其中5人失明或患有VI,倾向于通过听音来处理文本材料;其中5人不具备视觉视觉能力,倾向于通过视觉印刷品获取文本材料。结果显示,三组人根据他们喜欢的阅读方式(盲文、试听或印刷版)从文本中回忆起的命题,以及在听了等效文本的听觉表演后从文本中回忆起的命题,都没有差异。当两项任务的得分相互比较时,两组盲人和有视觉障碍的人都没有差异,但没有视觉障碍的人在阅读时比听文本时在回忆命题方面做得更好。本文提供了一个更具包容性的识字定义的经验建议,以增强失明和VI以及其他残疾人士的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信