Disability does not negatively impact linguistic visual-spatial processing for hearing adult learners of a signed language

Abstract

The majority of adult learners of a signed language are hearing and have little to no experience with a signed language. Thus, they must simultaneously learn a specific language and how to communicate within the visual-gestural modality. Past studies have examined modality-unique drivers of acquisition within first and second signed language learners. In the former group, atypically developing signers have provided a unique axis—namely, disability—for analyzing the intersection of language, modality, and cognition. Here, we extend the question of how cognitive disabilities affect signed language acquisition to a novel audience: hearing, second language (L2) learners of a signed language. We ask whether disability status influences the processing of spatial scenes (perspective taking) and short sentences (phonological contrasts), two aspects of the learning of a signed language. For the methodology, we conducted a secondary, exploratory analysis of a data set including college-level American Sign Language (ASL) students. Participants completed an ASL phonological- discrimination task as well as non-linguistic and linguistic (ASL) versions of a perspective-taking task. Accuracy and response time measures for the tests were compared between a disability group with self-reported diagnoses (e.g., ADHD, learning disability) and a neurotypical group with no self-reported diagnoses. The results revealed that the disability group collectively had lower accuracy compared to the neurotypical group only on the non-linguistic perspective-taking task. Moreover, the group of students who specifically identified as having a learning disability performed worse than students who self-reported using other categories of disabilities affecting cognition. We interpret these findings as demonstrating, crucially, that the signed modality itself does not generally disadvantage disabled and/or neurodiverse learners, even those who may exhibit challenges in visuospatial processing. We recommend that signed language instructors specifically support and monitor students labeled with learning disabilities to ensure development of visual-spatial skills and processing in signed language.

Sign learning of hearing children in inclusive day care centers—does iconicity matter?

“…By contrast, when analyzing sign learning independently of iconicity, language age in a spoken language and not chronological age seemed to be the determining factor ( Schüler et al, 2021 ). Accordingly, Joyce et al (2023) have shown that language-based skills are crucial for sign learning in adults irrespective of cognitive (dis)abilities. This suggests that language acquisition per se does not require cognitive abilities that are necessary to recognize iconicity.…”

“…Accordingly, for adults with ID, translucent signs have been shown to be acquired more effectively and to be more functional than other signs ( Meuris et al, 2014 ). Overall, the signed modality does not seem to present any particular disadvantages for adults with cognitive disabilities when compared to neurotypical learners ( Joyce et al, 2023 ).…”

L2 Learners’ Signed Language Processing Relates, in Part, to Perspective‐Taking Skills

“…No participants with reported disabilities were included in this study, but see Joyce et al. (2023) for an analysis of a subset of data from the present analysis in addition to data from beginning‐level hearing ASL learners, including students who identify with one or more cognitive disabilities.…”

“…One participant reported exposure from birth to American Sign Language from a Deaf signer in their home, and we included them because we could not attest to the quality or quantity of their signed language input; as such, this participant's data were treated the same as those of the other students in the classes. No participants with reported disabilities were included in this study, but see Joyce et al (2023) for an analysis of a subset of data from the present analysis in addition to data from beginning-level hearing ASL learners, including students who identify with one or more cognitive disabilities.…”