School Psychological Evaluation Reports for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children: Best Practices

Whitaker, Robert C.; Thomas-Presswood, Tania

doi:10.1080/1536710x.2017.1372242

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Because DHH children do not have full access to spoken language, or learn it as secondary to sign-language, non-verbal tests for cognitive ability are considered more valid in assessment of this population, compared with verbal tests (Whitaker & Thomas-Presswood, 2017). We used the two non-verbal subtests of the Dutch version of WISC-III (WISC-III NL ), Block Design and Picture Arrangement (de Kort et al, 2002;Wechsler, 1991).…”

Section: Cognitive Abilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Fairness decisions in children and early adolescents with and without hearing loss

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although having universal aspects, development of a sense of fairness, a milestone in children's social development, is influenced by social and cultural forces. Yet, it scarcely has been studied in children who are at risk for their social development, let alone in deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children, who have limited access to linguistic and social input. This study examined for the first time equity preferences in DHH children compared with hearing counterparts. About 179 children (8-11 years) and early adolescents (12-14 years) played four economic allocation games where they distributed coins between themselves and another child. Participants with and without hearing loss were similar in conditions that entailed non-costly prosociality or selfmaximization. However, DHH participants showed weaker inequity aversion in more complex conditions: DHH children were more willing to allow other players to receive more coins than themselves, compared with hearing children and to DHH or hearing adolescents, and DHH adolescents were less willing to share resources when it was self-costly, compared with all other groups. Findings are discussed in light of the tension between norms of social comparison and norms of prosociality, and how they are reflected in developmental trajectories for inequity aversion when access to these norms is limited.

show abstract

Section: Cognitive Abilitymentioning

confidence: 99%