Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Communication Disorders Quarterly
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rittenhouse, R. K.
Right arrow Articles by Baechle, C. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Metaphor and Conservation in Hearing-Impaired Children: Cued Speech, Manually-Coded English and Oral-Aural Comparisons

Robert K. Rittenhouse

University of Arkansas Little Rock, AR

Patricia Kenyon

Arkansas School for the Deaf Little Rock, AR

Jeannie Leitner

Raleigh Public Schools Raleigh, NC

Cathy L. Baechle

Gallaudet University Washington, DC

Tweny-three severely hearing-impaired adolescents and five normal-hearing students participated in this study. The hearing-impaired subjects ranged in chronological age from 11 years, 9 months to 18 years, 3 months (mean = 15 years, 3 months). All subjects had a pre-lingual unaided hearing loss of 70 to 100 dB in the speech range (mean = 89 dB). The hearing-impaired subjects were grouped according to the communication mode used at school in instructional situations (i.e., cued speech, manually-coded English, or oral-aural). The subjects were presented with 4 modified, Piagetian conservation problems and 10 linguistically-sensitive metaphor stories. While the cued speech group performed higher than any other group on the conservation problems and the oral-aural group performed better on the metaphoric problems than the other two hearing-impaired groups, the performance differences among and between them were not statistically significant.

Communication Disorders Quarterly, Vol. 11, No. 2, 253-262 (1988)
DOI: 10.1177/152574018801100203
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?