Assessment & Research

Analysis of reading strategies in deaf adults as a function of their language and meta-phonological skills.

Domínguez et al. (2014) · Research in developmental disabilities 2014
★ The Verdict

Deaf adult readers rely on a key-word strategy that builds vocabulary while sidelining grammar, so teach both content words and function words explicitly.

✓ Read this if BCBAs teaching reading to deaf or hard-of-hearing clients in school or clinic settings.
✗ Skip if Practitioners working only with hearing clients or on non-literacy goals.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Domínguez et al. (2014) watched 30 deaf adults read Spanish sentences while tracking their eye moves. The team also gave tests of vocabulary, sign language, and sound-based skills.

They wanted to see which reading strategy the adults used and how it linked to their language strengths.

02

What they found

Most readers used a key-word strategy. They looked longest at nouns and verbs and skipped little words like "the" or "of."

This helped them grow big vocabularies but left grammar weak. They still stored both the spelling and the sound of words in memory.

03

How this fits with other research

Cai et al. (2019) found the same thing in Chinese deaf children. Vocabulary, not sound skills, drove reading speed. The adult pattern starts early and stays.

Zakopoulou et al. (2011) showed that hearing preschoolers at risk for dyslexia had poor sound skills. Deaf adults keep those weak sound skills yet read with a different trick—key words—showing an alternate route to print.

Madhesh (2024) warns that quality-of-life tools for deaf teens are still messy. Reading is only one part of a bigger assessment puzzle we have not solved.

04

Why it matters

If you teach deaf clients, do not assume poor phonics is the whole story. Boost their content-word vocab fast, but add separate lessons on little function words and grammar so sentences make sense. Eye-movement data can show you where they skip—use that to target the gaps.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

During reading, pause at each function word, have the client sign or say its role in the sentence, then continue.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
other
Population
other
Finding
not reported

03Original abstract

The first aim of this study was to examine the mechanisms used in reading sentences by deaf adults who had completed secondary or higher education. Previous data allowed us to hypothesize that they used the key word strategy, consisting of identifying (some of) the frequent content words, and deriving an overall representation of the sentence's meaning ignoring the function words. The results supported the hypothesis. The second aim was to establish the relationships between this strategy and the linguistic and phonological abilities of deaf participants. The results show that vocabulary increased with reading level, but syntax, evaluated with the use of function words, did not. This suggests that using the key word strategy during long periods of time increases knowledge of content words but not syntax, probably because function words are neglected by this strategy. The results also showed that the deaf participants had a fairly large orthographical lexicon. This implies that the extensive use of the key word strategy allows them to store lexical information. The next question was whether the written word representations of the deaf participants were memorized as mere logograms, or if they had been stored in connection with the phonological representations of the corresponding words. The metaphonological tasks conducted produced evidence indicating that deaf participants used both orthographic and phonological representations. A factor analysis of the metaphonological tasks together with reading and spelling confirmed that both factors were necessary to explain the whole variance in the deaf group.

Research in developmental disabilities, 2014 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2014.03.039