查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- Working Memory, Language Production Rate, and Reading Comprehension of Chinese Deaf Readers
- 聾人閱讀中文詞時「詞彙觸接」與「短期記憶」歷程之轉錄現象研究
- 聽覺障礙學生閱讀理解能力之分析
- 工作記憶對國小五年級不同理解能力學童的區辨效果研究
- 聽覺障礙學生閱讀能力之探討
- 不同類型的工作記憶與中文閱讀理解的相關研究
- 可預測性繪本教學方案對國小聽覺障礙學生閱讀理解的成效
- 交互教學法對增進聽覺障礙學生閱讀理解能力之研究
- 國小聽覺障礙學生加、減法文字題閱讀理解能力之研究
- The Explicit and Implicit Phonological Processing of Chinese Characters and Words in Taiwanese Deaf Signers
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | Working Memory, Language Production Rate, and Reading Comprehension of Chinese Deaf Readers=工作記憶、語言產生效率與聾人的中文閱讀理解 |
---|---|
作 者 | 曾世杰; | 書刊名 | 特殊教育研究學刊 |
卷 期 | 22 2002.03[民91.03] |
頁 次 | 頁155-169 |
分類號 | 529.67 |
關鍵詞 | 閱讀; 聾人; 聽覺障礙; 工作記憶; 語言產出效率; Reading; Deaf; Hearing-impaired; Working memory; Language production rate; |
語 文 | 英文(English) |
中文摘要 | 本研究旨在探討成熟聾人「工作記憶容量」、「語言產出效率(speech of sign production rate)」與「中文閱讀理解」之間的關係。六十名學習語言前成聾的成人及30名聽力正常的口語-手語的雙語成人參與了本研究,所有的參與者都是大專以上教育程度。聾參與者中有30名使用手語溝通,不會說話;另外30以口語溝通,不會手語。雙語聽人取自啟聰學校教師及國內的手語譯員。 研究的第一部分是相關性研究,研究者蒐集參與者的工作記憶廣度(WM)、語言產出效率(LPR)及閱讀理解分數(COMP)。研究結果指出:1.工作記憶可以有效預測閱讀理解;2.LPR和WM成顯著負相關,唸一系列指定詞彙的時間愈長,WM的容量愈短。3.不同組的WM間有顯著差異,但以統計技術控制了LPR的影響後,各組WM平均值的差異不再顯著。 研究的第二部分是參與者內(within-panicipant)的真實驗研究。為了控制詞頻及參與者的先備經驗,實驗用的都是假漢字、假口語詞,假手語詞。研究要求參與者硬記十二個假漢字與其相對應的假口語詞、假手語詞。假漢字與假口語詞、假手語詞間的關係都是強制規定的,完全沒有既定的規則可循。研究者測量參與者的假漢字在兩種狀況的工作記憶廣度,及假口語詞、假手語詞的LPR。研究結果指出,當以統計技術控制LPR時,手語和口語模式的工作記憶容量,就沒有顯著差異了。 |
英文摘要 | The study aims to examine the relationships among working memory span(WM), language production rate (LPR), and reading comprehension (COMP) of mature Chinese deaf readers. Sixty prelingually-deaf adults, and 30 hearing bilinguals who speak and sign fluently participated in the study. Hearing participants were teachers of deaf schools or sign interpreters. All participants were college educated. Thirty of the deaf, with background in manuals, are Taiwanese Sign Language Signers and are not able to speak orally. Another 30, educated in oral programs, speak orally and are not able to sign. The first part of the study was associational in nature. Participants' working memory spans, language production rates, and scores of a reading comprehension test were collected. The results showed that: 1. WM was the best predictor of COMP. 2. LPR correlated negatively with WM, that is, the longer one took to articulate given words, the shorter the WM. 3. Means of WM were significantly different among groups. However, after statistically controlling the effect of LPR, the differences of WM means were no longer significant. 4. Based on Baddeley's (1986) WM model, the retention capacities for Central Executive (CE) and Phonological Loop (PL), respectively, in each group were estimated. According to the model, the WM variance could be accounted for by PL, rather than CE. The results supported the stated hypotheses. The second part of the study was a within-participant experiment. The 30 hearing bilinguals participated in the experiment. To control the effect of word frequency and participants' prior knowledge, pseudo-words and pseudo-characters were used as experimental materials. Participants were asked to memorize the artificial relationships between the pseudo-characters and their corresponding pseudo-signs, and the pseudo-characters and their corresponding pseudo-spoken-words. WM spans and LPRs of signed and spoken character lists were measured. The results indicated that the difference between signed and spoken WM spans was no longer significant when LPR was statistically controlled. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。