تعطیلات نوروزی مجله- ضمن تبریک فرارسیدن بهار و شروع سال جدید به اطلاع میرساند این نشریه از تاریخ ۲۵ اسفندماه ۱۴۰۲ لغایت ۱۳ فروردین ۱۴۰۳ تعطیل می باشد.

Volume 10 -                   MEJDS (2020) 10: 218 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Naeemi M. Comparing Responses to the Kim Carrad Test and the Tower of London Test Between Hearing-Impaired and Healthy Students. MEJDS 2020; 10 :218-218
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-1536-en.html
Department of Educational Sciences, Payame Noor University
Abstract:   (2244 Views)
Background & Objectives: Hearing impairments affect most adaptation aspects of individuals with the environment and cause a delay in their mental processes. Deaf children present unique features which can be improved using various behavioral, emotional, and educational methods. Deaf individuals experience significant delays in cognitive growth aspects and language generation. Primary hearing impairments could lead to creating compensatory changes in visual processing. Visual working memory can increase one of the observing functions in deaf individuals as well as planning and organizing ability as the main implementing interactions and brain functions. i.e., important to researchers. Thus, the current study aimed to explore the differences of visual active memory and organizing between hearing–impaired and healthy students.
Methods: This was a descriptive and causal–comparative study. The statistical population of the study consisted of all first–year students of deaf and ordinary middle schools in Arak City, Iran, in the academic year of 2018–2019. Sixty students (30 deaf & 30 healthy individuals) were selected through the convenience sampling method as the study sample. The inclusion criteria of this study were as follows: male students, aged 13 to 15 year, providing consent to participate in the study, a specific rate of hearing loss (students who have lost >25 decibels of hearing), the lack of intellectual disability, the lack of vision problems, and the lack of physical or motor issues. The exclusion criteria of the study were the lack of students’ collaboration in the research process and failure to complete the research tests by the students. The measurement tools in this study included the Tower of London test (Shallice, 1982) for measuring executive planning and organization and the Kim Karad test (Groth–Marnat, 2003) for the visual estimation of memory. The obtained data were analyzed in SPSS using Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) at a significance level of 0.01.
Results: The MANOVA results revealed a significant difference between hearing–impaired and healthy subjects concerning long–term memory and short–term memory (p<0.001) and working memory (p=0.034). Furthermore, there was a significant difference between the study groups in the time delay component, and overall time in the planning and organizing components (p<0.001).
Conclusion: Based on the present research findings, the memory ability as well as the planning and ‎‎organizing ability of students with hearing impairment ‎were weak; thus, such aspects require further ‎attention of the authorities.‎
Full-Text [PDF 526 kb]   (321 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Research Article | Subject: Rehabilitation

References
1. Mahmoodi A. The comparison of self-esteem and social skills in deaf and blind students at the intermediate level in the city of Karaj. Exceptional Education Journal. 2013;4(117):20–8. [Persian] [Article]
2. Pinquart M, Pfeiffer JP. Attainment of developmental tasks by adolescents with hearing loss attending special schools. American Annals of the Deaf. 2014;159(3):257–68. [DOI]
3. Calderon R, Greenberg M. Social and Emotional Development of Deaf Children: Family, School, and Program Effects. In: The Oxford Handbook of Deaf Studies, Language, and Education, Vol 1, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2011. pp: 188–99.
4. Nittrouer S, Lowenstein JH. Weighting of acoustic cues to a manner distinction by children with and without hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2015;58(3):1077–92. [DOI]
5. Yaghoobnezhad S, Hasanzadeh S. Investigate role of language and executive function in theory of mind development in deaf children. Exceptional Education Journal. 2015;2(130):13–22. [Persian] [Article]
6. Nittrouer S, Caldwell-Tarr A, Moberly AC, Lowenstein JH. Perceptual weighting strategies of children with cochlear implants and normal hearing. J Commun Disord. 2014;52:111–33. [DOI]
7. Bavelier D, Dye MWG, Hauser PC. Do deaf individuals see better? Trends Cogn Sci. 2006;10(11):512–8. 10.1016/j.tics.2006.09.006
8. Nava E, Bottari D, Zampini M, Pavani F. Visual temporal order judgment in profoundly deaf individuals. Exp Brain Res. 2008;190(2):179–88. [DOI]
9. Tangestani Zadeh F, Ahmadi E. Comparison of visual working memory in deaf and hearing-impaired students with normal counterparts: A research in people without sign language. Bimonthly Audiology. 2015;23(6):92–8. [Persian] [Article]
10. Gkouvatzi AN, Mantis K, Kambas A. Comparative study of motor performance of deaf and hard of hearing students in reaction time, visual-motor control and upper limb speed and dexterity abilities. International Journal of Special Education. 2010;25(2):15–25.
11. Nittrouer S, Lowenstein JH, Wucinich T, Moberly AC. Verbal working memory in older adults: the roles of phonological capacities and processing speed. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2016;59(6):1520–32. [DOI]
12. Millman RE, Mattys SL. Auditory verbal working memory as a predictor of speech perception in modulated maskers in listeners with normal hearing. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2017;60(5):1236–45. [DOI]
13. Shallice T. Specific impairments of planning. Philos Trans R Soc Lond, B, Biol Sci. 1982;298(1089):199–209. [DOI]
14. Levine M. The realization and utilization of organization. All kinds of minds; 2008. [Article]
15. Lezak MD, editor. Neuropsychological assessment. 5th ed. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press; 2012.
16. McCormack T, Atance CM. Planning in young children: A review and synthesis. Developmental Review. 2011;31(1):1–31. [DOI]
17. Sipal RF, Bayhan P. RETRACTED: Do Deaf children delay in their executive functioning due to their delayed language abilities? Psychology. 2011;2(7):737–42. [DOI]
18. Ghamarigivi h. Comparison of executive functions among children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, learning disability and normal children. Fundamentals of Mental Health. 2010;11(44): 322-33. [Persian]. [Article]
19. Saadipour E. Ravesh-haye Tahghigh dar Ravan-shenasi va oloum tarbiati [Research Methods in Psychology and Educational Sciences]. 2nd ed. Tehran: Doran Pub; 2014. [Persian]
20. Groth-Marnat G. Handbook of Psychological Assessment. 4th ed. Pashashrifi H, Nikkho MR. (Persian translator). Tehran: Sokhan Pub; 2003.
21. Panahi A. Normalization of Andre–ray test images on the middle school boys students of Tehran [Thesis for Master]. [Roudehen, Iran]: Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Islamic Azad University of Roudehen; 2004. [Persian]
22. Shallice T. Specific impairments of planning. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 1982;298(1089);199-209. [DOI]
23. Narimani M, Soleymani E, Zahed A, Abolghasemi A. Attention care, schethe effectiveness of executive functional (workinh memory;metacognitive; schedule) on improving of working memory, dule- resolvent ability and academic achievement in students of math learning disorder. Journal of Educational and Scholastic Studies. 2013;1(3):31. [Persian]
24. Roy RA. Auditory working memory: a comparison study in adults with normal hearing and mild to moderate hearing loss. Glob J Oto. 2018;13(3): 555862. [DOI]
25. Nittrouer S, Caldwell-Tarr A, Low KE, Lowenstein JH. Verbal working memory in children with cochlear implants. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2017;60(11):3342–64. [DOI]
26. Khanjani Z, Hashemi T, Jangi S, Bayat A. Comparing working memory and organization and programming ability in children with and without learning disabilities. Quarterly Journal of Child Mental Health. 2016;2(4):89–102. [Persian] [Article]
27. Kyle FE, Harris M. Concurrent correlates and predictors of reading and spelling achievement in deaf and hearing school children. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2006;11(3):273–88. [DOI]
28. Figueras B, Edwards L, Langdon D. Executive function and language in deaf children. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2008;13(3):362–77. [DOI]
29. Soleymani E. Performance comparison of students with and without math learning disorder in tower of london and continuous operation scale. Journal of Learning Disabilities. 2015;4(3):56–73. [Persian] [Article]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Middle Eastern Journal of Disability Studies

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb