2007
DOI: 10.1093/deafed/enm028
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Social Integration of Deaf Children in Inclusive Settings

Abstract: This article examines social integration of deaf children in inclusive settings in The Netherlands. Eighteen Grade 1-5 deaf children and their 344 hearing classmates completed 2 sociometric tasks, peer ratings and peer nomination, to measure peer acceptance, social competence, and friendship relations. Deaf and hearing children were found to be similar in their peer acceptance and friendship relations, but differences occurred in social competence. Deaf children scored lower than hearing children on prosocial … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
63
1
3

Year Published

2009
2009
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 98 publications
(69 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
2
63
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar negative results were reported in all the studies focusing exclusively on pupils with behavioural difficulties (De Monchy, Pijl, & Zandberg, 2004) and in studies where this group was examined amongst other groups (Mand, 2007). Interestingly, negative results were reported in studies focusing on other types of SEN including deafness (Wauters & Knoors, 2008), cerebral palsy (Nadeau & Tessier, 2006), learning disabilities (Bakker et al, 2007;Baydik & Bakkaloglu, 2009) and autism (Chamberlain, Kasari, & RotherhamFuller, 2007). It could be suggested that the peer nomination technique measures 'popularity' and therefore children with SEN, irrespectively of type of need experienced, are more likely to be overlooked than their peers in such studies.…”
Section: Studies Utilising the Peer Nomination Methodssupporting
confidence: 79%
“…Similar negative results were reported in all the studies focusing exclusively on pupils with behavioural difficulties (De Monchy, Pijl, & Zandberg, 2004) and in studies where this group was examined amongst other groups (Mand, 2007). Interestingly, negative results were reported in studies focusing on other types of SEN including deafness (Wauters & Knoors, 2008), cerebral palsy (Nadeau & Tessier, 2006), learning disabilities (Bakker et al, 2007;Baydik & Bakkaloglu, 2009) and autism (Chamberlain, Kasari, & RotherhamFuller, 2007). It could be suggested that the peer nomination technique measures 'popularity' and therefore children with SEN, irrespectively of type of need experienced, are more likely to be overlooked than their peers in such studies.…”
Section: Studies Utilising the Peer Nomination Methodssupporting
confidence: 79%
“…The association between hearing impairment and social isolation has been most evidently studied in the elderly population (Pronk et al, 2011;Strawbridge et al, 2000;Kramer et al, 2002) but appears to be present in other age groups as well: a survey of 178 cochlear implant candidates, Page 20 of 69 A c c e p t e d M a n u s c r i p t 20 aged 17-84 years, revealed elevated levels of social anxiety and loneliness as compared to their well hearing spouses (Knutson et al, 2006). Children with hearing loss on mainstream schools had fewer friends than their hearing peers and more often experienced feelings of social neglect (Nunes et al, 2006;Wauters and Knoors, 2008). These findings indicate that individuals with impaired hearing are prone to social isolation, regardless of their age.…”
Section: Social Isolationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In fact, in only one study 7-to 10-year-old HI children were found to display less prosocial behaviors than their NH classmates. 15 To our knowledge, no studies have been conducted with children with CI. However, from research into aspects related to empathy, we may infer that the development of empathy in HI individuals is impaired.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%