1,721,180 research outputs found

    Visual memory for shapes in deaf signers and non-signers and in hearing signers and non-signers: Atypical lateralization and enhancement

    No full text
    Deaf and hearing individuals who either used sign language (signers) or not (nonsigners) were tested on visual memory for objects and shapes that were difficult to describe verbally with a same/different matching paradigm. The use of 4 groups was designed to permit a separation of effects related to sign language use (signers vs. nonsigners) and effects related to auditory deprivation (deaf vs. hearing). Forty deaf native signers and nonsigners and 51 hearing signers and nonsigners participated in the study. Signing individuals (both deaf and hearing) were more accurate than nonsigning individuals (deaf and hearing) at memorizing shapes. For the shape memory task but not the object task, deaf signers and nonsigners displayed right hemisphere (RH) advantage over the left hemisphere (LH). Conversely, both hearing groups displayed a memory advantage for shapes in the LH over the RH. Results indicate that enhanced memory performance for shapes in signers (deaf and hearing) stems from the visual skills acquired through sign language use and that deafness, irrespective of language background, leads to the use of a visually based strategy for memory of difficult-to-describe items

    Perceived language proficiency and pain assessment by registered and student nurses in native English-speaking and EAL children aged 4–7 years

    No full text
    Aims and objectives: To identify the factors that influence decisions made by health professionals when assessing the pain of native English speaking and children whose English is an additional language. Background: Pain assessment in children is often poorly executed following acute injury. Whilst a range of pain assessment tools have been developed, little guidance is provided for assessing pain in children with English as an additional language. Design: Factorial survey design. Methods: Twenty minor injuries unit nurses and 20 children's nursing students participated in an electronic survey to make judgements on 12 scenarios describing a child attending a minor injuries unit following an incident, accompanied by a parent. Respondents had to decide the most important form of pain assessment, and whether they would ask a parent or an interpreter to assess the pain of the child. An open-ended question asked about the difficulties found in making a judgement. Results: Observation of the child's behaviour was the most common pain assessment reported. The visual analogue scale was significantly associated with children with proficient English. Respondents were significantly more likely to involve parents in the assessment if they could speak English well compared to parents with poor English skills. Moreover, nursing students were significantly more likely than registered nurses to call for support from an interpreter. Thematic analysis identified three themes related to difficulties with pain assessment: contrasting approaches, differing perceptions of pain and overcoming challenges. Conclusions: The reduced ability to communicate between child, parent and healthcare professional highlights the need to identify forms of assessment based on individual cases. Relevance to clinical practice: The number of children with English as an additional language has seen a marked rise over the last decade. In situations where communication ability is reduced, assessment of pain should be tailored to meet the needs of the child. This may require timely access to interpreter services

    The impact of language on the expression and assessment of pain in children

    No full text
    This paper focuses on the importance of language in the expression of pain. Variation in definitions of pain is presented, together with a review of the evidence examining the impact language may have on the way pain is expressed linguistically. The implications for conducting research with children who speak different languages are explored. Strategies such as using non-linguistic methods of communication, additional time required for conducting interviews and the inclusion of research team members from the same ethnic or linguistic background are presented

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore