论文部分内容阅读
背景:有关汉字的认知识别问题,近年来国内外也有一些研究,但多以听力正常的健康人为研究对象。目的:探讨聋人与听力正常人对汉字的音码、形码、义码的视觉信息加工方式。设计:以聋人为研究对象、正常人为对照组的回顾性观察对比分析。单位:一所大学的教育系。对象:研究于2001-10/2002-04年在西安进行,聋人选自西安市第二聋哑学校6～8年级的学生,共20名,男女各半,平均年龄17岁。纳入标准:听力丧失程度≥92dB者;排除标准:后天致聋者。他们从一年级入学起就开始接受口语训练和学习汉语拼音,但在日常交往中,手语仍是其主要的交往工具。听力正常人选自西安市99中的初三学生,28名,男女各半,平均年龄15岁。方法:采用系列视觉呈现,选择判断的方法比较聋人与听力正常人对分别强化的三类汉字的认知识别程度。主要观察指标:①聋人与听力正常人对义近、形似、音同三种汉字认知识别反应的比较;②聋人与听力正常人对汉字认知加工时间的比较。结果:聋人与听力正常人在字词的识别加工过程中,形码比音码的作用更强;在语义提取时,聋人采用了通过字形直取其义的字词直通加工方式,听力正常人则采用形-音转换后提取字义的加工方式。结论:聋人与听力正常人在汉字识别的内部心理机制方面并没有本质的区别,聋人可能也有语音编码,
Background: Concerning the problem of cognitive recognition of Chinese characters, there are some researches at home and abroad in recent years. However, most of them are healthy subjects with normal hearing. Objective: To explore the visual information processing method of Chinese phonetic code, shape code and meaning code for deaf and normal hearing people. Design: Deaf people as the research object, normal people as the control group retrospective observation comparative analysis. Unit: a university education department. PARTICIPANTS: The study was conducted in Xi’an from 2001-10 to 2004-04. Deaf people were selected from grades 6 to 8 of the second deaf-mute school in Xi’an with a total of 20 men and women with a mean age of 17 years. Inclusion criteria: degree of hearing loss ≥ 92dB; Exclusion criteria: acquired deafness. They began to receive oral training and Hanyu pinyin since their first year of school, but their sign language is still their main communication tool in daily interactions. Normal hearing students from Xi’an 99 selected junior high school students, 28, half-men and women, with an average age of 15 years. Methods: A series of visual presentations and selective judgments were used to compare the cognitive recognition of deaf and normal hearing people respectively. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: ① Comparison of Cognitive Recognition Response of Three Kinds of Chinese Characters among Deaf and Normal People with Normal Listening, Shape and Tone; ② Comparison of Cognitive Processing Time between Chinese Deaf and Normal People. Results: Deaf people and normal hearing people had stronger role than phonetic codes in recognizing and processing words. In semantic extraction, deaf people adopted the word straight through processing of glyphs Normal people use the shape-sound conversion to extract word processing. Conclusion: There is no essential difference between deaf and normal hearing people in the internal psychological mechanism of Chinese character recognition. Deaf people may also have speech coding,