Search

Stimulus degradation adds to working memory load during speech processing. We investigated whether this applies to sign processing and, if so, whether the mechanism implicates secondary auditory cortex. We conducted an fMRI experiment where 16 deaf early signers (DES) and 22 hearing non-signers performed a sign-based n-back task with three load levels and stimuli presented at high and low resolution. We found decreased behavioral performance with increasing load and decreasing visual resolution, but the neurobiological mechanisms involved differed between the two manipulations and did so for both groups. Importantly, while the load manipulation was, as predicted, accompanied by activation in the frontoparietal working memory network, the resolution manipulation resulted in temporal and occipital activation. Furthermore, we found evidence of cross-modal reorganization in the secondary auditory cortex: DES had stronger activation and stronger connectivity between this and several other regions. We conclude that load and stimulus resolution have different neural underpinnings in the visual-verbal domain, which has consequences for current working memory models, and that for DES the secondary auditory cortex is involved in the binding of representations when task demands are low., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permission@oup.com.)

Congenital deafness is often compensated by early sign language use leading to typical language development with corresponding neural underpinnings. However, deaf individuals are frequently reported to have poorer numerical abilities than hearing individuals and it is not known whether the underlying neuronal networks differ between groups. In the present study, adult deaf signers and hearing nonsigners performed a digit and letter order tasks, during functional magnetic resonance imaging. We found the neuronal networks recruited in the two tasks to be generally similar across groups, with significant activation in the dorsal visual stream for the letter order task, suggesting letter identification and position encoding. For the digit order task, no significant activation was found for either of the two groups. Region of interest analyses on parietal numerical processing regions revealed different patterns of activation across groups. Importantly, deaf signers showed significant activation in the right horizontal portion of the intraparietal sulcus for the digit order task, suggesting engagement of magnitude manipulation during numerical order processing in this group.

Early deafness results in crossmodal reorganization of the superior temporal cortex (STC). Here, we investigated the effect of deafness on cognitive processing. Specifically, we studied the reorganization, due to deafness and sign language (SL) knowledge, of linguistic and nonlinguistic visual working memory (WM). We conducted an fMRI experiment in groups that differed in their hearing status and SL knowledge: deaf native signers, and hearing native signers, hearing nonsigners. Participants performed a 2-back WM task and a control task. Stimuli were signs from British Sign Language (BSL) or moving nonsense objects in the form of point-light displays. We found characteristic WM activations in fronto-parietal regions in all groups. However, deaf participants also recruited bilateral posterior STC during the WM task, independently of the linguistic content of the stimuli, and showed less activation in fronto-parietal regions. Resting-state connectivity analysis showed increased connectivity between frontal regions and STC in deaf compared to hearing individuals. WM for signs did not elicit differential activations, suggesting that SL WM does not rely on modality-specific linguistic processing. These findings suggest that WM networks are reorganized due to early deafness, and that the organization of cognitive networks is shaped by the nature of the sensory inputs available during development.

Experimental work has shown better visuospatial working memory (VSWM) in profoundly deaf individuals compared to those with normal hearing. Other data, including the UK Biobank resource shows poorer VSWM in individuals with poorer hearing. Using the same database, the authors investigated VSWM in individuals who reported profound deafness. Included in this study were 112 participants who were profoundly deaf, 1310 with poor hearing and 74,635 with normal hearing. All participants performed a card-pair matching task as a test of VSWM. Although variance in VSWM performance was large among profoundly deaf participants, at group level it was superior to that of participants with both normal and poor hearing. VSWM in adults is related to hearing status but the association is not linear. Future study should investigate the mechanism behind enhanced VSWM in profoundly deaf adults.

Working memory (WM) for spoken language improves when the to-be-remembered items correspond to preexisting representations in long-term memory. We investigated whether this effect generalizes to the visuospatial domain by administering a visual n-back WM task to deaf signers and hearing signers, as well as to hearing nonsigners. Four different kinds of stimuli were presented: British Sign Language (BSL; familiar to the signers), Swedish Sign Language (SSL; unfamiliar), nonsigns, and nonlinguistic manual actions. The hearing signers performed better with BSL than with SSL, demonstrating a facilitatory effect of preexisting semantic representation. The deaf signers also performed better with BSL than with SSL, but only when WM load was high. No effect of preexisting phonological representation was detected. The deaf signers performed better than the hearing nonsigners with all sign-based materials, but this effect did not generalize to nonlinguistic manual actions. We argue that deaf signers, who are highly reliant on visual information for communication, develop expertise in processing sign-based items, even when those items do not have preexisting semantic or phonological representations. Preexisting semantic representation, however, enhances the quality of the gesture-based representations temporarily maintained in WM by this group, thereby releasing WM resources to deal with increased load. Hearing signers, on the other hand, may make strategic use of their speech-based representations for mnemonic purposes. The overall pattern of results is in line with flexible-resource models of WM.

Background and Aims: Children with good phonological awareness (PA) are often good word readers. Here, we asked whether Swedish deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children who are more aware of the phonology of Swedish Sign Language, a language with no orthography, are better at reading words in Swedish., Methods and Procedures: We developed the Cross-modal Phonological Awareness Test (C-PhAT) that can be used to assess PA in both Swedish Sign Language (C-PhAT-SSL) and Swedish (C-PhAT-Swed), and investigated how C-PhAT performance was related to word reading as well as linguistic and cognitive skills. We validated C-PhAT-Swed and administered C-PhAT-Swed and C-PhAT-SSL to DHH children who attended Swedish deaf schools with a bilingual curriculum and were at an early stage of reading., Outcomes and Results: C-PhAT-SSL correlated significantly with word reading for DHH children. They performed poorly on C-PhAT-Swed and their scores did not correlate significantly either with C-PhAT-SSL or word reading, although they did correlate significantly with cognitive measures., Conclusions and Implications: These results provide preliminary evidence that DHH children with good sign language PA are better at reading words and show that measures of spoken language PA in DHH children may be confounded by individual differences in cognitive skills., (Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Sensory cortices undergo crossmodal reorganisation as a consequence of sensory deprivation. Congenital deafness in humans represents a particular case with respect to other types of sensory deprivation, because cortical reorganisation is not only a consequence of auditory deprivation, but also of language-driven mechanisms. Visual crossmodal plasticity has been found in secondary auditory cortices of deaf individuals, but it is still unclear if reorganisation also takes place in primary auditory areas, and how this relates to language modality and auditory deprivation. Here, we dissociated the effects of language modality and auditory deprivation on crossmodal plasticity in Heschl's gyrus as a whole, and in cytoarchitectonic region Te1.0 (likely to contain the core auditory cortex). Using fMRI, we measured the BOLD response to viewing sign language in congenitally or early deaf individuals with and without sign language knowledge, and in hearing controls. Results show that differences between hearing and deaf individuals are due to a reduction in activation caused by visual stimulation in the hearing group, which is more significant in Te1.0 than in Heschl's gyrus as a whole. Furthermore, differences between deaf and hearing groups are due to auditory deprivation, and there is no evidence that the modality of language used by deaf individuals contributes to crossmodal plasticity in Heschl's gyrus., (Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Deaf native signers have a general working memory (WM) capacity similar to that of hearing non-signers but are less sensitive to the temporal order of stored items at retrieval. General WM capacity declines with age, but little is known of how cognitive aging affects WM function in deaf signers. We investigated WM function in elderly deaf signers (EDS) and an age-matched comparison group of hearing non-signers (EHN) using a paradigm designed to highlight differences in temporal and spatial processing of item and order information. EDS performed worse than EHN on both item and order recognition using a temporal style of presentation. Reanalysis together with earlier data showed that with the temporal style of presentation, order recognition performance for EDS was also lower than for young adult deaf signers. Older participants responded more slowly than younger participants. These findings suggest that apart from age-related slowing irrespective of sensory and language status, there is an age-related difference specific to deaf signers in the ability to retain order information in WM when temporal processing demands are high. This may be due to neural reorganisation arising from sign language use. Concurrent spatial information with the Mixed style of presentation resulted in enhanced order processing for all groups, suggesting that concurrent temporal and spatial cues may enhance learning for both deaf and hearing groups. These findings support and extend the WM model for Ease of Language Understanding.

Working memory (WM) for sign language has an architecture similar to that for speech-based languages at both functional and neural levels. However, there are some processing differences between language modalities that are not yet fully explained, although a number of hypotheses have been mooted. This article reviews some of the literature on differences in sensory, perceptual and cognitive processing systems induced by auditory deprivation and sign language use and discusses how these differences may contribute to differences in WM architecture for signed and speech-based languages. In conclusion, it is suggested that left-hemisphere reorganization of the motion-processing system as a result of native sign-language use may interfere with the development of the order processing system in WM.

The working memory model for Ease of Language Understanding (ELU) predicts that processing differences between language modalities emerge when cognitive demands are explicit. This prediction was tested in three working memory experiments with participants who were Deaf Signers (DS), Hearing Signers (HS), or Hearing Nonsigners (HN). Easily nameable pictures were used as stimuli to avoid confounds relating to sensory modality. Performance was largely similar for DS, HS, and HN, suggesting that previously identified intermodal differences may be due to differences in retention of sensory information. When explicit processing demands were high, differences emerged between DS and HN, suggesting that although working memory storage in both groups is sensitive to temporal organization, retrieval is not sensitive to temporal organization in DS. A general effect of semantic similarity was also found. These findings are discussed in relation to the ELU model.