Short-term memory in deaf and hearing children in relation to stimulus characteristics

Liben, Lynn S.; Drury, Alinda M

doi:10.1016/0022-0965(77)90020-0

Cited by 32 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Results further support recent findings (e.g., Liben & Drury 1977), suggesting primacy effects may occur without any ostensible overt cumulative rehearsal. Experiment 1 replicates Swanson's (1982) finding that normal and deaf children accommodate verbal code to facilitate visual retrieval; however, that study and Experiment 1 do not provide clear support that LD readers do not benefit from their own verbal codes.…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 87%

“…Since providing names during recall may involve assimilating unfamiliar forms into a pre-existing verbal schema, congenitally deaf children were included in the experiment. Since deaf children do not have spontaneous oral labels readily available for unfamiliar visual forms (Fromkin & Ainsfeld 1977), comparative data on normal and LD children's verbal-visual recall performance, especially primacy positions, may be more clearly interpreted from influences of covert rehearsal and spatial memory (see Liben & Drury 1977). Consistent with the verbal deficit notion, the major hypothesis of this study was that naming, as induced by prior name training, would facilitate recall for normal and deaf children but not for LD children.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One reason for this inconsistency in results may be due to attributing the lack of verbal rehearsal in children to deficient naming processes (the implicit assumption being that naming is a prerequisite for verbal rehearsal). There exists, however, fairly explicit data showing that children do name stimuli but do not rehearse (e.g., Ferguson & Bray 1976, Liben & Drury 1977. The reason most investigators associate a lack of rehearsal with a deficient naming mechanism is that normal and disabled children who are taught explicitly to name each stimulus manifest better overall recall (e.g., Torgesen & Goldman 1977).…”

mentioning

confidence: 93%

“…These results suggested that verbal coding expanded the amount of information that can be visually recalled for normals, while disabled readers seemed to rely on a visual representation without reference to a verbal label. These experiments raised interesting questions on nonstrategic (recall without any ostensible cumulative rehearsal; see Liben & Drury 1977 for discussion) aspects of visual recall for disabled readers: Does implicit linguistic coding enhance or retard visual learning? How are serial positions most noticeably affected by implicit naming?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A Study of Nonstrategic Linguistic Coding on Visual Recall of Learning Disabled Readers

Swanson¹

1983

J Learn Disabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three experiments directly investigated Vellutino's (1977) verbal-deficit hypothesis, which suggests reading difficulties of learning disabled children are attributable to deficiencies in linguistic coding. Short-term retention was studied using random shapes to minimize effects of prior verbal learning. Adopting a probe-type serial memory task, normal and LD readers were compared on recall performance after pretraining of named and unnamed stimulus conditions. Recall was markedly better for normal subjects trained with names compared with the unnamed control condition, while disabled children demonstrated inferior recall on named compared with unnamed pretraining. Experiment 1 demonstrated that verbal encoding effects were stronger for normal and deaf subjects than for disabled, especially on primacy positions. Experiment 2 suggested children s (normal and disabled) idiosyncratic verbal coding did not facilitate recall compared with names provided by the experimenter. Experiment 3 suggested that names for random shapes, regardless of age, facilitated recall for normal but not for disabled readers. Verbal codes appeared particularly important in differentiating groups at primacy positions. Consistent in all three experiments, no difference was found in recall of unnamed shapes between normal and LD readers. These experiments suggest that primary reading deficits are related to integrative linguistic deficiencies and not to deficiencies of visual memory or rehearsal.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 93%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Study of Nonstrategic Linguistic Coding on Visual Recall of Learning Disabled Readers

Swanson¹

1983

J Learn Disabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Deaf children with cochlear implants who use either communication mode are likely to rely on covert verbal rehearsal strategies in many language processing tasks because such mechanisms have been measured in deaf children without cochlear implants (Bebko, 1984;Liben & Drury, 1977). In addition, it has been shown that when carrying out memory tasks, deaf children, like their normal-hearing peers, display word length effects which are assumed to reflect speed of articulation (Campbell & Wright, 1990).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Speech timing and working memory in profoundly deaf children after cochlear implantation

Burkholder

Pisoni

2003

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

155

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thirty-seven profoundly deaf children between 8-and 9-years-old with cochlear implants and a comparison group of normal-hearing children were studied to measure speaking rates, digit spans, and speech timing during digit span recall. The deaf children displayed longer sentence durations and pauses during recall and shorter digit spans compared to the normal-hearing children. Articulation rates, measured from sentence durations, were strongly correlated with immediate memory span in both normal-hearing and deaf children, indicating that both slower subvocal rehearsal and scanning processes may be factors that contribute to the deaf children's shorter digit spans. These findings demonstrate that subvocal verbal rehearsal speed and memory scanning processes are not only dependent on chronological age as suggested in earlier research by Cowan and colleagues (1998). Instead, in this clinical population the absence of early auditory experience and phonological processing activities before implantation appears to produce measurable effects on the working memory processes that rely on verbal rehearsal and serial scanning of phonological information in short-term memory.

show abstract

Social Contexts and Functions of Children’s Remembering

Paris¹,

Newman²,

Jacobs³

1985

Springer Series in Cognitive Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Short-term memory in deaf and hearing children in relation to stimulus characteristics

Cited by 32 publications

References 14 publications

A Study of Nonstrategic Linguistic Coding on Visual Recall of Learning Disabled Readers

A Study of Nonstrategic Linguistic Coding on Visual Recall of Learning Disabled Readers

Speech timing and working memory in profoundly deaf children after cochlear implantation

Social Contexts and Functions of Children’s Remembering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About