» Articles » PMID: 37714887

Sign Language Experience Has Little Effect on Face and Biomotion Perception in Bimodal Bilinguals

Overview
Journal Sci Rep
Specialty Science
Date 2023 Sep 15
PMID 37714887
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Sensory and language experience can affect brain organization and domain-general abilities. For example, D/deaf individuals show superior visual perception compared to hearing controls in several domains, including the perception of faces and peripheral motion. While these enhancements may result from sensory loss and subsequent neural plasticity, they may also reflect experience using a visual-manual language, like American Sign Language (ASL), where signers must process moving hand signs and facial cues simultaneously. In an effort to disentangle these concurrent sensory experiences, we examined how learning sign language influences visual abilities by comparing bimodal bilinguals (i.e., sign language users with typical hearing) and hearing non-signers. Bimodal bilinguals and hearing non-signers completed online psychophysical measures of face matching and biological motion discrimination. No significant group differences were observed across these two tasks, suggesting that sign language experience is insufficient to induce perceptual advantages in typical-hearing adults. However, ASL proficiency (but not years of experience or age of acquisition) was found to predict performance on the motion perception task among bimodal bilinguals. Overall, the results presented here highlight a need for more nuanced study of how linguistic environments, sensory experience, and cognitive functions impact broad perceptual processes and underlying neural correlates.

Citing Articles

Neural adaptations in short-term learning of sign language revealed by fMRI and DTI.

Alotaibi S, Alamri S, Alsaleh A, Meyer G Sci Rep. 2025; 15(1):5345.

PMID: 39948087 PMC: 11825837. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-84468-z.

References
1.
Newman A, Bavelier D, Corina D, Jezzard P, Neville H . A critical period for right hemisphere recruitment in American Sign Language processing. Nat Neurosci. 2001; 5(1):76-80. DOI: 10.1038/nn775. View

2.
Hauser P, Paludneviciene R, Riddle W, Kurz K, Emmorey K, Contreras J . American Sign Language Comprehension Test: A Tool for Sign Language Researchers. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2015; 21(1):64-9. DOI: 10.1093/deafed/env051. View

3.
Allen J, Emmorey K, Bruss J, Damasio H . Neuroanatomical differences in visual, motor, and language cortices between congenitally deaf signers, hearing signers, and hearing non-signers. Front Neuroanat. 2013; 7:26. PMC: 3731534. DOI: 10.3389/fnana.2013.00026. View

4.
Bosworth R, Wright C, Dobkins K . Analysis of the visual spatiotemporal properties of American Sign Language. Vision Res. 2019; 164:34-43. PMC: 6783377. DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2019.08.008. View

5.
Burton A, White D, McNeill A . The Glasgow Face Matching Test. Behav Res Methods. 2010; 42(1):286-91. DOI: 10.3758/BRM.42.1.286. View