{"title":"聋哑学生和健听学生理解词汇类型的差异：指导干预措施的结果","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jcomdis.2024.106458","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Vocabulary knowledge is an essential element in language development. There is evidence of significant differences in vocabulary knowledge between deaf children and hearing peers of the same age. These differences put deaf students at a disadvantage when compared to their hearing counterparts. The aim of this study was to investigate whether certain types of words characterise the lexical difficulties of deaf students. Our starting point is that this knowledge is needed to design interventions that are adapted to the particular needs of these students for their lexical development.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We evaluated the lexical comprehension of 90 Spanish students. The sample comprised 45 hearing students and 45 students with severe or profound hearing loss. Both groups were attending the later years of primary school (8 to –12-year-olds). They were tested using the Spanish Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III. The performance of both groups was statistically compared using percentiles and standard scores as well as a selected set of words from the test.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>No significant differences between hearing and deaf groups were found by age, sex, and sociocultural level. Significant differences were found between groups in their percentile and standard scores. There were no significant differences in performance between the two groups on only five of the 25 words with the highest error rate in the deaf group. The qualitative analysis of the remaining 20 words that were especially challenging for deaf students reveals results of interest which could help guide interventions.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The results indicate the need for lexical intervention for deaf students in the final years of primary school. The specialised support service for deaf learners should approach the intervention by targeting a specific type of vocabulary, making the semantic relationships between these words more transparent and promoting a deeper understanding of them.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49175,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Communication Disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differences in the type of vocabulary understood by deaf and hearing students: Results to guide interventions\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcomdis.2024.106458\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Vocabulary knowledge is an essential element in language development. There is evidence of significant differences in vocabulary knowledge between deaf children and hearing peers of the same age. These differences put deaf students at a disadvantage when compared to their hearing counterparts. The aim of this study was to investigate whether certain types of words characterise the lexical difficulties of deaf students. Our starting point is that this knowledge is needed to design interventions that are adapted to the particular needs of these students for their lexical development.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We evaluated the lexical comprehension of 90 Spanish students. The sample comprised 45 hearing students and 45 students with severe or profound hearing loss. Both groups were attending the later years of primary school (8 to –12-year-olds). They were tested using the Spanish Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III. The performance of both groups was statistically compared using percentiles and standard scores as well as a selected set of words from the test.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>No significant differences between hearing and deaf groups were found by age, sex, and sociocultural level. Significant differences were found between groups in their percentile and standard scores. There were no significant differences in performance between the two groups on only five of the 25 words with the highest error rate in the deaf group. The qualitative analysis of the remaining 20 words that were especially challenging for deaf students reveals results of interest which could help guide interventions.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The results indicate the need for lexical intervention for deaf students in the final years of primary school. The specialised support service for deaf learners should approach the intervention by targeting a specific type of vocabulary, making the semantic relationships between these words more transparent and promoting a deeper understanding of them.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49175,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Communication Disorders\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Communication Disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021992424000546\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Communication Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021992424000546","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Differences in the type of vocabulary understood by deaf and hearing students: Results to guide interventions
Introduction
Vocabulary knowledge is an essential element in language development. There is evidence of significant differences in vocabulary knowledge between deaf children and hearing peers of the same age. These differences put deaf students at a disadvantage when compared to their hearing counterparts. The aim of this study was to investigate whether certain types of words characterise the lexical difficulties of deaf students. Our starting point is that this knowledge is needed to design interventions that are adapted to the particular needs of these students for their lexical development.
Methods
We evaluated the lexical comprehension of 90 Spanish students. The sample comprised 45 hearing students and 45 students with severe or profound hearing loss. Both groups were attending the later years of primary school (8 to –12-year-olds). They were tested using the Spanish Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III. The performance of both groups was statistically compared using percentiles and standard scores as well as a selected set of words from the test.
Results
No significant differences between hearing and deaf groups were found by age, sex, and sociocultural level. Significant differences were found between groups in their percentile and standard scores. There were no significant differences in performance between the two groups on only five of the 25 words with the highest error rate in the deaf group. The qualitative analysis of the remaining 20 words that were especially challenging for deaf students reveals results of interest which could help guide interventions.
Conclusions
The results indicate the need for lexical intervention for deaf students in the final years of primary school. The specialised support service for deaf learners should approach the intervention by targeting a specific type of vocabulary, making the semantic relationships between these words more transparent and promoting a deeper understanding of them.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Communication Disorders publishes original articles on topics related to disorders of speech, language and hearing. Authors are encouraged to submit reports of experimental or descriptive investigations (research articles), review articles, tutorials or discussion papers, or letters to the editor ("short communications"). Please note that we do not accept case studies unless they conform to the principles of single-subject experimental design. Special issues are published periodically on timely and clinically relevant topics.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
