Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2026
The Role of Working Memory in Deaf Adults' Visual Word Recognition: Evidence From Dual-Task Paradigm.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cui Nannan, Teng Yue, Wu Yan, Wang Suiping
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Although working memory (WM) is crucial for reading comprehension, evidence regarding its role during reading in deaf individuals is ambiguous and is primarily based on correlational findings. This study aimed to investigate whether WM influences the real-time lexical processing of deaf adults and, if so, whether this influence varies across different WM domains (e.g., verbal vs. visuospatial).
METHOD: The present study employed a dual-task paradigm to examine the role of WM in word recognition among individuals with hearing loss. Experiment 1 manipulated verbal WM load during visual word recognition, whereas Experiment 2 investigated the effects of visuospatial WM load. Both experiments included three participant groups: a hearing loss group and two control groups with typical hearing (a reading ability-matched group and an age-matched group). Experiment 1 recruited 87 participants, with 29 in each group. Experiment 2 included 78 participants, with 26 in each group.
RESULTS: Under the WM dual-task (word recognition-WM) condition, the word recognition speed of individuals with hearing loss was significantly influenced. Compared to the age-matched and reading ability-matched hearing participants, the deaf participants had slower response times, which were significantly slower than those observed under the baseline task condition (word recognition task only), indicating a stronger interference effect from WM.
CONCLUSION: Compared to individuals with typical hearing, the visual word recognition of individuals with hearing loss relies more on WM, with both verbal and visuospatial WM playing significant roles in the process.
METHOD: The present study employed a dual-task paradigm to examine the role of WM in word recognition among individuals with hearing loss. Experiment 1 manipulated verbal WM load during visual word recognition, whereas Experiment 2 investigated the effects of visuospatial WM load. Both experiments included three participant groups: a hearing loss group and two control groups with typical hearing (a reading ability-matched group and an age-matched group). Experiment 1 recruited 87 participants, with 29 in each group. Experiment 2 included 78 participants, with 26 in each group.
RESULTS: Under the WM dual-task (word recognition-WM) condition, the word recognition speed of individuals with hearing loss was significantly influenced. Compared to the age-matched and reading ability-matched hearing participants, the deaf participants had slower response times, which were significantly slower than those observed under the baseline task condition (word recognition task only), indicating a stronger interference effect from WM.
CONCLUSION: Compared to individuals with typical hearing, the visual word recognition of individuals with hearing loss relies more on WM, with both verbal and visuospatial WM playing significant roles in the process.