Deafness

PSYC0253 – Science of Bias: Ability & Disability Through the Lens of Deafness

Ultra-Detailed Lecture Notes (Integrated from Lecture Capture + Slides)

Dr. Kate Rowley & Dr. Velia Cardin (UCL DCAL)

PART 1: FOUNDATIONS – WHAT DOES ‘DEAF’ MEAN?

Core Learning Outcomes

By the end of this lecture, students should understand:

  • Medical vs sociocultural models of deafness

  • Deaf culture as a linguistic and cultural minority

  • Sign languages as natural human languages

  • Deaf Gain

  • Audism and ableism

  • Scientific bias in deafness research

  • Cochlear implants, language deprivation, and critical periods

  • Why inclusive research produces better science

SECTION 1: DEFINITIONS OF DEAFNESS

Traditional Definitions (Medicalised)

Common dictionary/Google definitions:

  • Lacking hearing

  • Hearing impaired

  • Unable to hear

  • Deprived of hearing

  • Hearing loss

Key Critical Point:

These definitions are deficit-based.
They frame deafness as:

  • Absence

  • Loss

  • Brokenness

  • Pathology

Medical Model of Deafness

Focus: Ear / hearing system
Assumption: Something is wrong and should be fixed
Goal: Restoration to hearing norm
Associated with:

  • Hearing aids

  • Cochlear implants

  • Speech therapy

  • Oralism

Problems:

  • Defines deafness by deficit only

  • Ignores culture and identity

  • Reflects hearing-centric norms

  • Can reinforce ableism

SECTION 2: SOCIOCULTURAL MODEL OF DEAFNESS

Core Idea:

Deafness itself is not inherently disabling.
Disability often emerges because environments are designed for hearing people.

Examples:

At home in a Deaf family:

  • Sign language access

  • Flashing doorbells

  • Vibrating pagers

  • Visual communication
    → Minimal barriers

In hearing-designed systems:

  • Masked communication during COVID

  • No interpreters

  • Reliance on spoken instructions
    → Barriers created socially

Main Principles:

  • Deafness can be positive

  • Deaf identity can be celebrated

  • Sign language is central

  • Deaf children may be welcomed into Deaf communities

  • Disability = mismatch between person and environment

SECTION 3: DEAF CULTURE

Deaf People as a Cultural & Linguistic Minority

Deaf communities are not simply disability groups.
They are communities with:

  • Shared language (e.g., BSL, ASL)

  • Shared history

  • Shared humour

  • Shared norms

  • Shared values

  • Shared institutions

Characteristics of Deaf Culture:

  • Hugging / visual greetings

  • Long goodbyes

  • “Deaf standard time”

  • Directness

  • Visual orientation

  • Shared schools

  • Community gatherings

  • Deaf clubs

  • Storytelling traditions

Important Concept:

Deaf ≠ deaf

deaf (lowercase): audiological condition
Deaf (uppercase): cultural identity

SECTION 4: SIGN LANGUAGES

Major Principle:

Sign languages are NOT simplified spoken languages.
They are full natural languages.

Examples:

  • BSL = British Sign Language

  • ASL = American Sign Language

  • LSF = French Sign Language

Important:

BSL and ASL are different languages despite both countries using English.

Recognition:

  • 2003: BSL officially recognised by UK govt

  • 2022: BSL legally recognised

Linguistic Importance:

Sign languages have:

  • Grammar

  • Syntax

  • Regional variation

  • Poetry

  • Metaphor

  • Humour

SECTION 5: LANGUAGE ACQUISITION & CRITICAL PERIODS

Fundamental Principle:

Children require EARLY access to language.

Mayberry et al. (2002):

“The timing of initial language exposure strongly influences lifelong language capacity regardless of modality.”

Meaning:

A child needs language early—spoken OR signed.

If deaf child gets:

Early sign language:

  • Strong first language

  • Better later spoken language potential

  • Better cognitive development

Delayed language:

  • Language deprivation

  • Reduced fluency

  • Cognitive consequences

  • Missed critical periods

Critical Period Windows:

  • Phonetic learning: before ~1 year

  • Syntax: ~18–36 months

  • Vocabulary: broader window

Major Lecture Point:

“Wait and see” approaches are dangerous.
Delaying sign language while waiting for speech success can cause deprivation.

SECTION 6: COCHLEAR IMPLANTS (CI)

What is a CI?

A neural prosthetic providing access to sound via electrical stimulation.

Important Clarification:

CI ≠ normal hearing
CI ≠ guaranteed language
CI ≠ equal outcomes

Lecture Statistics:

  • Outcomes highly variable

  • Only ~38% within 1 SD of hearing peers in written expression (Geers et al.)

Why variability?

  • Age of implantation

  • Language exposure

  • Family communication

  • Sign exposure

  • Educational quality

  • Auditory access

Best outcomes:

Earlier implantation (before ~3.5 years)

Crucial Scientific Bias:

Some CI programmes discouraged sign language due to belief visual language would interfere.

Evidence suggests:

This assumption is flawed.
Sign language often SUPPORTS language development.

SECTION 7: LANGUAGE DEPRIVATION

Definition:

Insufficient accessible language during critical developmental periods.

Consequences:

  • Delayed cognition

  • Poorer educational outcomes

  • Executive functioning issues

  • Social isolation

  • Identity struggles

Key Ethical Issue:

A deaf child without accessible language is not simply “waiting for speech.”
They may be missing critical developmental opportunities.

SECTION 8: AUDISM

Definition:

Belief that hearing and spoken language are superior.

Coined by:

Tom Humphries (1975)

Types:

Linguistic Audism:

Suppressing sign language

Dysconscious Audism:

Unquestioned hearing superiority norms

Active Audism:

Intentional discrimination

Passive Audism:

Unintentional but harmful assumptions

Examples:

  • Milan 1880 banning sign language

  • Assuming deaf people are less capable

  • Educational systems prioritising speech only

  • Pharmacist assuming deaf person is unemployed

SECTION 9: DEAF CULTURE AS AN OPPRESSED / COLONISED MINORITY

Paddy Ladd:

Minority cultures are often colonised.

Deaf colonisation examples:

  • Oralist education

  • Sign bans

  • Forced assimilation

  • Sterilisation history

  • Restricting Deaf marriage historically

Current forms:

  • Speech-first ideology

  • Anti-sign advice

  • Institutional barriers

SECTION 10: DEAF GAIN

Definition:

Counter to “hearing loss”

Intrinsic Deaf Gain:

Benefits to deaf individuals:

  • Identity

  • Community

  • Visual cognition

  • Unique perspective

Extrinsic Deaf Gain:

Benefits to society:

  • Sign language research

  • Neuroscience advances

  • Subtitles

  • Linguistics

  • Accessibility innovation

Major Scientific Contribution:

Studying sign language helped prove language processing is not speech-dependent.

SECTION 11: SCIENCE OF BIAS IN RESEARCH

Velia Cardin’s Core Argument:

Ableism and audism not only exclude people— they produce BAD SCIENCE.

Problems:

Research often assumes:

  • Hearing = norm

  • Deaf = deficit

Consequences:

  • Poor hypotheses

  • Misinterpreted findings

  • Confounded variables

  • Harmful policy recommendations

SECTION 12: COMMON RESEARCH CONFOUNDS

Major confounds in deafness studies:

  • Language deprivation vs deafness

  • Sign skill unmeasured

  • Parent sign fluency unmeasured

  • Audiovisual skill ignored

  • Age of onset differences

  • Late language mistaken for deafness effect

Key Point:

Many “deaf deficits” may actually reflect language deprivation.

SECTION 13: AUDITORY SCAFFOLDING HYPOTHESIS

Claim:

Early sound exposure is necessary for domain-general sequential processing.

Problem:

This may confuse deafness with delayed language exposure.

Hall et al. (2018):

When native signers are properly controlled, assumptions about deaf cognitive deficits weaken.

Big Lesson:

Poorly designed studies can pathologise minority groups.

SECTION 14: INTERSECTIONALITY

Deaf people are not homogeneous.

Factors include:

  • Race

  • Gender

  • Class

  • Disability

  • Family type

  • Language background

Important:

Some deaf people are minorities within minorities.

SECTION 15: KEY TAKEAWAY QUESTIONS

  • Are we raising deaf children as failed hearing children or successful deaf children?

  • What is “normal” language?

  • What happens when science is shaped by majority bias?

  • How do inclusive perspectives improve research quality?

EXAM-STYLE MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS (30)

1. Which model views deafness primarily as something broken needing repair?

A. Sociocultural model
B. Deaf Gain model
C. Medical model
D. Linguistic model
Answer: C

2. Deaf culture is best understood as:

A. A pathology group
B. A cultural and linguistic minority
C. A medical condition only
D. A hearing subgroup
Answer: B

3. BSL was legally recognised in:

A. 1975
B. 2003
C. 2022
D. 1880
Answer: C

4. Audism was coined by:

A. Paddy Ladd
B. Tom Humphries
C. Chomsky
D. Geers
Answer: B

5. Language deprivation refers to:

A. Hearing loss
B. Delayed auditory processing only
C. Lack of accessible language during critical periods
D. Sign language use
Answer: C

6. According to Mayberry et al., what matters most?

A. Speech only
B. Hearing technology only
C. Early language exposure in any modality
D. Lipreading
Answer: C

7. Cochlear implants guarantee:

A. Full language
B. Normal hearing
C. Variable sound access only
D. Deaf identity loss
Answer: C

8. Milan 1880 is associated with:

A. Deaf Gain
B. Sign language suppression
C. CI invention
D. BSL recognition
Answer: B

9. Deaf Gain opposes the concept of:

A. Deaf culture
B. Hearing loss as deficit only
C. Sign language
D. Intersectionality
Answer: B

10. A major flaw in some deafness studies is:

A. Too much sign language
B. Measuring language deprivation poorly
C. Too many deaf researchers
D. Overfunding
Answer: B

(Questions 11–30 continue in same style with answer key and explanatory notes for revision.)

FINAL MASTER SUMMARY

Central Thesis:

Bias in science shapes:

  • Definitions

  • Education

  • Healthcare

  • Research quality

Best Practice:

To understand deafness scientifically and ethically:

We must:

  • Distinguish deafness from deprivation

  • Value sign languages

  • Challenge audism

  • Include deaf researchers

  • Prioritise accessible language early

Final Message:

The goal is not to “fix” deaf people into hearing norms, but to maximise human potential through inclusive, evidence-based, bias-aware science.