We conduct the first modern econometric analysis of the historical deaf population in the United States by incorporating deafness into a model of human capital. We find that the deaf population invested less in observable educational and physical human capital. Lower literacy, employment, and occupational scores also suggest that unobserved human capital investments were not substantial enough to improve productivity to the level of the hearing population. States that subsidized schools for the deaf provided deaf people with improved social capital and access to intangible goods that they pursued at the cost of higher economic achievement. Finally, we argue that substantial lifecycle differences between the hearing and deaf populations have implications for unbiased school attendance and employment rate estimation.

Sign language research is important for our understanding of languages in general and for the impact it has on policy and on the lives of deaf people. There is a need for a sign language proficiency measure, to use as a grouping or continuous variable, both in psycholinguistics and in other sign language research. This article describes the development of a Swedish Sign Language Sentence Repetition Test (STS-SRT) and the evidence that supports the validity of the test’s interpretation and use. The STS-SRT was administered to 44 deaf adults and children, and was shown to have excellent internal reliability (Cronbach’s alpha of 0.915) and inter-rater reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient [ICC] = 0.900, p < .001). A linear mixed model analysis revealed that adults scored 20.2% higher than children, and delayed sign language acquisition were associated with lower scores. As the sign span of sentences increased, participants relied on their implicit linguistic knowledge to scaffold their sentence repetitions beyond rote memory. The results provide reliability and validity evidence to support the use of STS-SRT in research as a measure of STS proficiency.

This study investigates reading comprehension in adult deaf and hearing readers. Using correlational analysis and stepwise regression, we assess the contribution of English language variables (e.g., vocabulary comprehension, reading volume, and phonological awareness), cognitive variables (e.g., working memory (WM), nonverbal intelligence, and executive function), and language experience (e.g., language acquisition and orthographic experience) in predicting reading comprehension in deaf and hearing adult bilinguals (native American Sign Language (ASL) signers, non-native ASL signers, and Chinese–English bilinguals (CEB)), and monolingual (ML) controls. For all four groups, vocabulary knowledge was a strong contributor to reading comprehension. Monolingual English speakers and non-native deaf signers also showed contributions from WM and spoken language phonological awareness. In contrast, CEB showed contributions of lexical strategies in English reading comprehension. These cross-group comparisons demonstrate how the inclusion of multiple participant groups helps us to further refine our understanding of how language and sensory experiences influence reading comprehension.

A Deaf with disabilities (DWD) male professor, 2 hearing female teacher candidates, 11 parents (4 of whom were immigrants), and 6 DWD children sought to better understand the experiences of parents of DWD children by conducting an ethnographic study (Singer, Kamenakis, Shapiro, & Cacciato, in press). The research team recorded reflexive journals as a way to analyse their methodology. In this essay, we reflect on 3 themes developed from the reflexive journals: (a) researcher positionality, (b) negotiating power in research, and (c) language variation in practice. We discuss our experiences and contextualise these accounts within relevant scholarship, attempting to locate some amount of resolution to the very human experiences upon which we reflect. We provide key takeaways for doing research with and among people with disabilities in special educational settings, particularly focusing on people who communicate in nonnormative ways. We conclude with a culminating discussion of the significance of creating emancipatory special education research.

Although life-story work is an established form of support for people with dementia and their carers, culturally Deaf people who are sign language users have been excluded from this practice. There is no evidence base for the cultural coherence of this approach with Deaf people who sign, nor any prior investigation of the linguistic and cultural adaptation that might be required for life-story work to be effective for sign language users with dementia. Given the lack of empirical work, this conceptual thematic literature review approaches the topic by first investigating the significance of storytelling practices amongst Deaf communities across the lifespan before using the findings to draw out key implications for the development of life-story work with culturally Deaf people who experience dementia and their formal and informal carers (whether Deaf or hearing). The reviewed work is presented in three themes: (a) the cultural positioning of self and others, (b) learning to be Deaf and (c) resistance narratives and narratives of resistance. The article concludes that life-story work has the potential to build on lifelong storying practices by Deaf people, the functions of which have included the (re)forming of cultural identity, the combating of ontological insecurity, knowledge transmission, the resistance of false identity attribution, and the celebration of language and culture.

Eye fixation measures were used to examine English relative clause processing by adult ASL–English bilingual deaf readers. Participants processed subject relative clauses faster than object relative clauses, but expected animacy cues eliminated processing difficulty in object relative clauses. This brings into question previous claims that deaf readers’ sentence processing strategies are qualitatively different from those of hearing English native speakers. Measures of English comprehension predicted reading speed, but not differences in syntactic processing. However, a trend for ASL self-ratings to predict the ability to handle syntactic complexity approached significance. Results suggest a need to explore how objective ASL proficiency measures might provide insights into deaf readers’ ability to exploit syntactic cues in English.

The purpose of this research was to investigate factors that influence professionals’ guidance of parents of children with hearing loss regarding spoken language multilingualism and spoken language choice. Sixteen professionals who provide services to children and young people with hearing loss completed an online survey, rating the importance of a range of potential influences on the guidance they provide to parents. These participants were invited to comment on the importance of these influences. Participants included teachers of the deaf, speech-language pathologists, special education teachers, psychologists, auditory-verbal therapists, Auslan interpreters, and curriculum coordinators. All participants had experience working with multilingual families and reported that they would sometimes or always recommend multilingualism for children with hearing loss, with fewer reporting that they would sometimes recommend monolingualism. Professionals placed greater importance on factors relating to family and community considerations (e.g., family language models, communication within the family, community engagement), and less importance on organisational policy and children's characteristics. This research provides an initial insight into the factors that professionals consider when guiding parents around spoken language and spoken language multilingualism decision-making for their children with hearing loss.

What is the time course of cross-language activation in deaf sign–print bilinguals? Prior studies demonstrating cross-language activation in deaf bilinguals used paradigms that would allow strategic or conscious translation. This study investigates whether cross-language activation can be eliminated by reducing the time available for lexical processing. Deaf ASL–English bilinguals and hearing English monolinguals viewed pairs of English words and judged their semantic similarity. Half of the stimuli had phonologically related translations in ASL, but participants saw only English words. We replicated prior findings of cross-language activation despite the introduction of a much faster rate of presentation. Further, the deaf bilinguals were as fast or faster than hearing monolinguals despite the fact that the task was in their second language. The results allow us to rule out the possibility that deaf ASL–English bilinguals only activate ASL phonological forms when given ample time for strategic or conscious translation across their two languages.

Embodied theories of cognition propose that humans use sensorimotor systems in processing language. The Action-Sentence Compatibility Effect (ACE) refers to the finding that motor responses are facilitated after comprehending sentences that imply movement in the same direction. In sign languages there is a potential conflict between sensorimotor systems and linguistic semantics: movement away from the signer is perceived as motion toward the comprehender. We examined whether perceptual processing of sign movement or verb semantics modulate the ACE. Deaf ASL signers performed a semantic judgment task while viewing signed sentences expressing toward or away motion. We found a significant congruency effect relative to the verb’s semantics rather than to the perceived motion. This result indicates that (a) the motor system is involved in the comprehension of a visual–manual language, and (b) motor simulations for sign language are modulated by verb semantics rather than by the perceived visual motion of the hands.