an experimental replication of hand and finger usage patterns among congenitally blind, braille...

An Experimental Replication of Hand and Finger Usage Patterns among Congenitally

Blind, Braille Reading Adults: A Pilot Study

Loana K. MasonAmerican Printing House for the Blind

Research in the RockiesJune 2010

Introduction

Literacy is linked to positive life outcomes in education, employment, financial status, & self-esteem (Ryles, 1996)

Post-school outcomes for people who are blind & visually impaired are extremely poor as indicated by an unemployment rate greater than 70% (AFB, 2010)

Braille readers are not acquiring literacy skills at the same rate as their sighted peers (Emerson, Holbrook, & D’Andrea, 2009)

Problem

Law mandates the use of research-based practices (NCLB, 2001)

Lack of scientifically-based research on literacy for students with visual impairments (Ferrell, Mason, & Young, 2006)

One experimental study contradicts current practices regarding braille mechanics (Ferrell, Mason, & Young, 2006)

Problem: Fluke or Fact?14 congenitally blind braille readers between the ages of 8-10 were tested

Hand dominance Sentence reading with…

Left index fingerRight index fingerLeft middle fingerRight middle finger

Found that participants read faster with left middle finger

Hermelin & O’Connor, 1971

Literature Review100+ years of literature on braille mechanics

Mechanics Deemed Best by Practitioners

Use of both hands independently Use of at least 4 fingers Use of light pressure & smooth tracking

Research is often inconclusive, contra-dictory, or based on observational data

Literature on Hand UsageConsensus that both hands results in fastest & most accurate reading

Disagreement over the role that each hand plays

Predominant Patterns of Hand Usage Left = placeholder/Right = reader Both hands parallel Both hands parallel for majority of line

Independent hand usage Both hands parallel & then one or both hands track backwards

Hand Usage Continued

Hand Dominance Patterns Left hand superiority Right hand superiority Equal hand superiority

Emerging Patterns Left-hand advantage for beginning readers

Left-hand advantage for struggling readers

Hand use may depend on task & familiarity

Literature on Finger UsageIndex, middle, ring, & pinky fingers capable of tactile discrimination, but index & middle are most sensitive

Index fingers of both hands believed to be primary reading fingers

Little consensus over the role of the left versus the right reading fingers

Literature on Tracking

Good braille readers… Exert light pressure Maintain a continuous left-to-right movement

Engage in little scrubbing or retracing

Faint pattern has emerged which suggests that the left hand checks uncertainties or corrects decoding errors

Literature on Cerebral Processes

SpatialProcessin

g

LanguageProcessin

g

XLanguag

eProcessin

g

SpatialProcessin

g

Literature on Cerebral Processes & Braille

Braille reading requires both language and spatial processing, & thus, it makes sense that good braille readers would use both hands

Left hand superiority may indicate a reliance on individual symbol decoding

Right hand superiority may indicate a reliance on language processing at the word/short phrase level

Literature on Braille FluencyBraille readers have consistently been shown to read slower than sighted peers

This has typically been attributed to the inability of braille readers to chunk text

Paucity of research available on strategies to increase fluency for braille readers

Research QuestionsWhich pattern of hand usage & finger usage results in the greatest degree of fluency?

Is there a relationship between handedness & hand usage patterns as indicated by the greatest degree of fluency?

Is there a relationship between certain characteristics of braille instruction & braille reading fluency?

Research Design

Constructive replication

2 factor (3x3), counterbalanced, within-subjects experiment

Independent Variables Hand usage Finger usage

Dependent Variable Fluency = Correct Words Per Minute (CWPM)

ParticipantsSampling Process

Congenitally blind adults braille readers utilized so as not to deplete the limited sample pool of children with visual impairments

E-mails sent to the coordinators of disability services at 4 Midwestern colleges with information to be sent to potential participants

Participants were paid $25 for voluntary participation

Participants #1 #2 #3

Gender Female Female Female

Age 54 25 20

Eye Condition ROP Unknown LCA

Educational Placement

Public Schools Public Schools Public Schools

Literacy Modalities

Braille & Auditory

Auditory & Braille

Braille & Auditory

Age Braille was Introduced

7 2 or 3 4

Age at which Contracted Braille was Introduced

Gradually Introduced Early On

7 or 8 6 or 7

Number of Years Reading Braille

47 22 or 23 16

Preferred Braille Mechanics

2 Handed; Parallel

Movements

1 & 2 Handed; Left = Reader &

Right = Placeholder

2 Handed; Parallel &

independent Movements

Data CollectionIndividual testing sessions arranged upon receipt of signed consent forms

Baseline assessment conducted

9 treatment assessments conducted in random order

Handedness assessed at midpoint through a variety of pre-designated physical tasks

Content of AssessmentsBraille Symbols

63 in baseline 7 in each treatment condition

Graded Word List 10 randomly chosen words from published IRIs

Graded Reading Passage Length ranges from 142 -252 words

Randomly selected from published IRIs

Instrumentation

Randomly assigned assessments to randomly ordered treatment conditions

Reader allowed to utilize preferred braille mechanics during baseline assessment

No data on instrument reliability & validity for this study

Hand Conditions

Left Right Both

Finger Conditions

Index Condition A

Condition B Condition C

Middle Condition D

Condition E Condition F

Index + Middle

Condition G

Condition H

Condition I

Treatment Conditions

Braille Reading &Recording Stand

Assessments brailled on transparent paper & dots darkened with marker

Hand & finger movements video-taped from below the transparent surface

Oral reading recorded

Data AnalysisRecorded miscues & determined whether the miscues were significant or not

Calculated CWPM

Tallied reading patch activation in multiple finger conditions

Determined handedness

Results forParticipant One

Isolated Finger Fluency

Condition A

Condition B

Condition D

Condition E0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

SymbolsWordsPassages

Total Fluency

Baseline Condition A Condition B Condition C Condition D Condition E Condition F Condition G Condition H Condition I0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Symbols Words Passages

Pre-Existing Hand & Finger

Preferences

Reading Patch Activation During Baseline

Symbols = right index Words = right index Passage = right index

Handedness Left on 6 out of 10 tasks

Hand Preferences During Dual Treatment Conditions

Symbols Words Passages0

1

2

3

4

BothRightLeft

Finger Preferences During Dual Treatment Conditions


1

2

3

4

BothMiddleIndex

Results forParticipant Two


Condition A

Condition B

Condition D

Condition E0

10

20

30

40

50

60


Fluency

Baseline Condition A Condition B Condition C Condition D

Condition E Condition F Condition G

Condition H

Condition I0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100



Preferences


Symbols = left index Words = left index Passage = left index

Handedness Right on 10 out of 10 tasks



1

2

3

4

BothRightLeft



1

2

3

4

BothMiddleIndex

Results forParticipant Three


Condition A

Condition B

Condition D

Condition E0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90


Fluency

Baseline Condition A Condition B Condition C Condition D

Condition E Condition F Condition G

Condition H

Condition I0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200



Preferences


Symbols = left & right index Words = left & right index Passage = left & right index

Handedness Right on 10 out of 10 tasks



1

2

3

4

BothRightLeft



1

2

3

4

BothMiddleIndex

Discussion

Preferred method used during baseline for all participants was the left & right index fingers but only both fingers were dominant for 1 participant

Baseline not necessarily the most fluent method

Discussion Continued

Best fluency for all participants obtained when using both index fingers

While the most fluent method is similar to the preferred method used during the baseline, patterns of finger dominance vary across the two conditions


Best fluency across all treatment conditions occurred while reading passages, which may support the theory that effective braille reading relies on more than symbol decoding

Participant with lowest fluency did poorest on conditions using only the right hand & demonstrated a slight left index finger dominance


Different pattern emerging than found by Hermelin & O’Connor

Limitations

Small sample size prevents statistical analysis

There may be an order effect since the treatment conditions were the same for all participants

Limitations Continued

Hand & finger patterns for a variety of reading levels across a variety of ages & stages of learning to read were not examined in the pilot study

Results may be tied more to the braille mechanics that most closely approximate the hand & finger usage patterns they have used for many years

an experimental replication of hand and finger usage patterns among congenitally blind, braille...

Documents