Effects of Sensory and Signed Language Experience on the Neural Basis of Visual Motion Processing

T. M. EVANS1, O. A. OLULADE1, D. S. KOO1,2, *G. F. EDEN1

1Georgetown University, Washington, DC; 2Gallaudet University, Washington, DC
National Science Foundation Science of Learning Center - Visual Language and Visual Learning, VL2

NSF Center Funding: SBE 0541953

Other funding: NICHD P50 HD40095

RESULTS

INTRODUCTION
Previous investigations have shown that the neural substrates mediating visual
motion processing are altered by sensory (i.e. deafness) and/or American Sign
Language (ASL) experience [1,2,3]

x = 57

Native Users of ASL:

QUESTION

STG

Deaf
>
Hearing

No right STG difference, instead greater left superior parietal

Hearing > Deaf
no results

How Does Sign Language Experience

Impact Visual Motion?

y = -59
SPL
PreCun
MdFG

Cun

Native Users of English:

Deaf > Hearing
Hearing > Deaf

Hearing Participants
Direct contrast of hearing participants with and without

signing experience revealed no differences

Deaf Participants
Parallel comparison in deaf participants (deaf native signers
vs. deaf oral/cued English group) revealed significantly
greater activation in right precuneus, precentral gyrus and
bilateral cingulate/medial frontal gyri in deaf native signers. In
deaf users of sign, there is heightened activity in posterior
dorsal stream and frontal regions involved in attention

SPL

z = 61

During acquisition of fMRI data, all

subjects performed one of two tasks:

EFFECTS OF LANGUAGE EXPERIENCE

x=3

Dynamic Indicated direction (right/left) of motion

of coherent dots via button press:

lobe activity in deaf adults raised with oral or cued English,

compared to hearing participants

z = 55
x=3
PreCun
MdFG

METHODS

Native Users of ASL

Significantly greater activation in right STG (replicating
findings by 1, 2, 3) extending into primary auditory cortex, and
in supplementary motor area (SMA) in deaf native signers
compared to hearing native signers
Native Users of English

SMA

HYPOTHESIS
Language experience (use of ASL, early bilingualism)
results in such profound neural changes, making it likely
that these in turn modulate experience-dependent
plasticity following sensory experience.

Effects of Sensory Experience on Visual Motion in

Two Independent Deaf Populations

y = -34

STG

Participants in this research have been native users of ASL, hence the question
arises whether the sensory-induced plasticity would be the same for deaf people
who are not native users of sign, but instead grew up with English

Do deaf users of English demonstrate differences during

visual motion perception attributed to sensory
experiences in the same way as has been reported in
deaf native users of ASL?

SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS

EFFECTS OF SENSORY EXPERIENCE

y = -3

Deaf Participants:

PreCun
MdFG
PostCing

Static (control) Indicated side (left/right) of the screen containing

greater density of dots:

PrCG

Native Users of ASL

>
Native Users of English

Sensory-dependent plasticity will differ for

deaf individuals depending on their
language background. Studies in native
users of ASL cannot be generalized to the
entire deaf population.

REFERENCES!
+

1.

Bavelier D, Brozinsky C, Tomann A, Mitchell T, Neville H, Liu G. Impact of early deafness and early exposure
to sign language on the cerebral organization for motion processing. J. Neurosci. 2001 Nov 15;21(22):8931
42.

2.

Fine I, Finney EM, Boynton GM, Dobkins KR. Comparing the effects of auditory deprivation and sign language
within the auditory and visual cortex. J Cogn Neurosci. 2005 Oct;17(10):162137.

3.

Sadato N, Okada T, Honda M, Matsuki K-I, Yoshida M, Kashikura K-I, et al. Cross-modal integration and
plastic changes revealed by lip movement, random-dot motion and sign languages in the hearing and deaf.
Cereb. Cortex. 2005 Aug;15(8):111322.

Single subject maps generated for Dynamic > Static Conditions

PrCG

Two-sample t-tests performed to assess between-group differences (p < 0.005

height threshold, p < 0.005 extent threshold, *FWE cluster-level corrected p < 0.05)
In scanner performance: ANOVA on group x condition is not significant

z = 66

Native Users of English > Native Users of ASL

no results
Hearing Participants:
no results

CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
edeng@georgetown.edu