Working : Chunks of Information

Daniel Koo, Ph.D. Department of Memory

• The ability to encode, store and retrieve information. • The basis of which we can analyze and process linguistic and visual input from the external world. • Critical to language development (i.e. vocabulary) Memory

Why is memory important to language development? Language is transient in nature. In a single word, initial phonemes (or signs) are held in memory until the end of the word is reached. In sentences, initial words (or signs) are held in memory until the end of the sentence. Ready?

Roethlisberger Neurotransmitter Methamphetamine Weihnachten Elizabeth, New Jersey, when my mother was being raised there in a flat over her father’s grocery store, was an industrial port a quarter the size of Newark, dominated by the Irish working class and their politicians, andneighborhood thoughconfidenceNewNewark’sdiscovereddominatedpoliticiansElizabethmothercomplainJewishIllthoughPTApresidentgeneralElizabethFather’sindustrialhavingthenfinallythatwhenmotherworkingheardfirstvicePTANewarktheirneverwasuntilherandPTAbeing-toquartersheathatraisedthereflatoverheranportasizeofbytheIrishandIbeenasgirlitnottoshestorewasclassin inthetreatedIawasmy never Jersey heard her complain of having been pointedlymarriedbecomemovednewtheandleda ill-treated in Elizabeth as a girl, it was not until she married and moved to Newark’s new Jewish neighborhood that she discovered the confidence that led her to become first a PTA mother, then a PTA vice president and finally the PTA president. (shortened from Philip Roth’s A Plot Against America) Cues to aid memory of verbal items

• Knowledge of phonology • Knowledge of syntactic structure • Contextual information • Articulation rate • Semantic knowledge Memory Models

• Atkinson & Shiffrin (1968)- Short Term Store and Long Term • Baddeley & Hitch (1974)- : “Temporary storage of information that is being processed in any range of cognitive tasks” – Phonological Loop Central – Visuospatial Sketchpad Executive – Central Executive

Phonological Visuospatial Loop Sketchpad A Working Model

Sensory Working Long-Term Memory Memory Memory

Phonological Loop Encoding Visuo-Spatial Sketch Pad Retrieval Deaf People and Memory

• Serial of Digit Span of Hearing non- signers is typically 7 ± 2 items • Deaf signers = 4 ± 2 items (Hanson,1982) • Is this discrepancy due to deafness or the use of ASL? Digit Span (Boutla et al. 2004)

• What about Hearing Native signers? Stimuli presented in English: 7 items Stimuli presented in ASL: 5 items • Could there be a phonological similarity effect in signs? Stimuli using ASL letters instead of ASL numbers Results: Item recall in ASL is still less than English Digit Span (Boutla et al. 2004)

• Are there differences in working memory capacity between deaf and hearing people? Test this by presenting word lists and asking subjects to recall items using a self-generated sentence. Does not have to be in order • Results: Hearing= 3.22 items Deaf= 2.94 items • No differences in working memory resources between deaf and hearing people Digit Span

Bavelier, Boutla, and colleagues (2006): Differences in capacity is due to modality differences Wilson and Emmorey (2006a): Differences in capacity is due to articulatory timing effects. Signs take longer to produce physically than to speak. So therefore we see lower span capacity in deaf. Serial Recall of Digits (Koo et al. 2008)

5 groups of different communication and sensory experiences 1. Hearing non-signers = Presented verbally 2. Hearing ASL users = Presented verbally 3. Deaf ASL users = Presented using signs 4. Deaf Oral users = Presented orally 5. Deaf Cuers = Presented using Cued Speech Digit Stimuli: 1. Verbally presented in native language 2. Visually presented on computer Serial Recall of Digits

Digit Span

30 * * 25 n.s.

20

Verbal 15 Visual

Raw Scores Raw 10

5

0 H HA DA DO DC

Koo et al., (2008) Serial Recall of Digits

• No significant differences between verbal and visual presentation of the digit stimuli • Deaf cuers, deaf oral users, and deaf signers show significantly lower recall of digits than hearing people

Koo et al., (2008) (Sperling, 1960)

• Iconic (visual) memory: 0.5 seconds • Echoic (auditory) memory: 3-4 seconds

Sensory Working Long-Term Memory Memory Memory

Echoic Phonological 3-4 sec Loop Encoding Encoding Iconic Visuo-Spatial 0.5 sec Sketch Pad Retrieval Working Memory Conclusions

• Differences in sensory modality may have greater effect on serial recall than language differences. • This effect is independent of modality of stimuli presentation (visual or verbal) and language (English or ASL). • Sensory information decay occurs more rapidly in the visual medium than in the auditory medium. But what about children with CI?

• Do children with CI show the same working memory capacity as their hearing peers? • Participants: – 26 deaf children of hearing parents: Avg age=9.1 yrs. – CI implantation between 1-6 yrs (Avg age=2.5) with average duration of 6.7 yrs. – Spoken English used at home – All attended mainstreamed schools

(Fagan et al. 2007) Memory in CI Children

Standardized Testing: Vocabulary Comprehension . Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) Reading measures . Lindamood Auditory Conceptualization Test (LAC3) . Peabody Individual Achievement Test (PIAT-R) . Word attack subtest of Woodcock Reading Mastery Test (WRMT) Working Memory . Digit Span: Forward and Backward Spans

(Fagan et al. 2007) Memory in CI Children

Results . Deaf CI children scored lower on vocabulary comprehension than hearing peers on PPVT. . Deaf CI children were equal to hearing peers on WRMT, PIAT, and LAC3. . Deaf CI children scored lower on Digit Span than hearing peers Consistent with other studies (Geers, 2003; Pisoni & Cleary, 2003; Dawson et al., 2002).

(Fagan et al. 2007) Memory in CI Children

Cochlear implants may have audiological and linguistic benefits but working memory capacity in children with CIs is still not comparable to hearing norms. Why? Information held in working memory may be in visual modality even in implanted children Summary

• Working memory is a critical component in language development • No differences in working memory between deaf and hearing populations • Performance on working memory tasks are more influenced by modality differences in the linguistic input than the language itself Some practical tips for memory

• Exercises – Memorize sentences – Poems, verses, songs, etc. • Building on linguistic knowledge i.e. Syntactic, semantic, phonological • Sequential exercises – Visual: Simon – Motor: Dance moves – Auditory: Music Cues to aid memory of verbal items

• Knowledge of phonology • Knowledge of syntactic structure • Contextual information • Articulation rate • Semantic knowledge References

Atkinson, R.C. and Shiffrin, R.M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In Spence, K.W. & Spence, J.T. (Eds.) The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol 2). p. 89-195. New York: Academic Press. Baddeley, A. & Hitch, G. (1974). Working Memory. In G.H. Bower (Ed.) The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 8). p.47-89. New York: Academic Press. Boutla, M., Supalla, T., Newport, E.L., Bavelier, D. (2004) Short-term memory span: Insights from sign language. Nature Neuroscience, 7, p. 997-1002. Fagan, M., Pisoni, D., Horn, D. and Dillon, C. (2007). Neuropsychological correlates of vocabulary, reading, and working memory in deaf children with cochlear implants. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf 12(4), p. 461-471. Hanson, V.L. (1982) Short-term recall by deaf signers of American Sign Language: Implication of encoding strategy for ordered recall. Journal of , 8, p. 572-583. Koo, D., Crain, K., LaSasso, C., Eden, G., (2008) Phonological awareness and short-term memory in hearing and deaf individuals of different communication backgrounds. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1145, p. 83-99. Wilson, M. and Emmorey, K. (2006a) Comparing sign language and speech reveals a universal limit on short-term memory capacity. Psychological Science, 17 (8), p. 682-683. Contact Information

[email protected] This training was brought to you by: Outreach Services, VSDB

Debbie Pfeiffer, Ed.D, CED Director [email protected] (540) 414-5249 Special thanks to:

• Dr. Daniel Koo for his wonderful presentation today;

• The Virginia Department of Education, provider of the grant that funds Outreach Services, VSDB;

• Interpreters from Gallaudet Interpreting Services and from the Virginia School for the Deaf and the Blind for their services today;

• Cavalier Reporting for captioning services for this webinar and for providing technical assistance for those using CART today; and

• All of YOU, for the services you provide daily for students and their families!