Priority Grant 2011 Final

Priority Grant Application 2011
Pick, Koo, & Garrido-Nag

Page 1
Cognitive and Electrophysiological Correlates of

Phonological Processes in Deaf Undergraduate Readers
Gallaudet Research Institute

Priority Grant Application
Spring 2011
Principal Investigator: Lawrence H. Pick, Ph.D.,

Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, Gallaudet University
Co-Investigator: Daniel S. Koo, Ph.D.,

Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, Gallaudet University
Co-Investigator: Karen Garrido-Nag, M.Phil, M.S.,

Instructor, Department of Hearing, Speech, Language Sciences, Gallaudet University
Page 2
ABSTRACT
Although much is known about the reading achievement levels of deaf individuals, we know less about how certain
undergraduate students become strong readers. One prevailing assumption is that phonological awareness and processes,
as well as working memory and executive functions play a critical role in reading achievement. Thus far, there is a paucity
of neuropsychological data and neurophysiological evidence to support this claim in deaf individuals. This study will
examine the cognitive and electrophysiological profiles of deaf undergraduate readers using American Sign Language as
their primary mode of communication. A comprehensive battery of neuropsychological measures will be administered to
gain a better understanding of the cognitive, linguistic, and reading profiles of strong versus weak readers. Further, Event
Related Potential (ERP) recordings will be used to determine whether strong versus weak readers show amplitude and
temporal differences in cortical regions known for phonological processing. A rhyme judgment paradigm will be
employed to examine differential cortical responses at P200 and N400 indices for matched versus mismatched word pairs.
Page 3
Statement of Problem
Traditionally, phonological processing is taken to mean the use of sound structure to process written or oral
information. We know that phonology plays a central role in reading development (Ashby, 2010). The average hearing
person learns to read by matching acquired knowledge of spoken phonology to orthography and uses additional cognitive
processes (e.g., working memory and executive functioning) to support this process (Catts & Kamhi, 2005). It has been
argued that degraded auditory processing is a source of reading disability in hearing children (Tallal, 1980), and by
analogy reduced access to visual information on the phonological features of language could result in poorer phonological
and reading abilities.
By contrast, deaf people with congenital and/or early-onset hearing loss do not necessarily have sufficient
auditory access to spoken language and for them learning to read is an entirely different endeavor. Many studies have
consistently shown that a significant number of pre-lingual deaf individuals with profound hearing losses lag significantly
behind their hearing peers in standardized measures of reading performance (Conrad, 1979; Karchmer, Milone, & Wolk,
1979). Recent data suggest that the median grade equivalent reading level for the general deaf population is the third to
fourth grade (Traxler, 2000). These difficulties have been attributed to diminished phonological skills, vocabulary, and
knowledge of English syntax, and slower access to word meaning (Quigley & Paul,1994; Marschark, 2003), rather than a
lack of native language (i.e., ASL). A possible explanation for this performance deficit is that deafness prevents access to
spoken phonology and by extension, the use of phonetic coding in working memory, which has been shown to be a strong
predictor of reading ability (Tallal, 1980).
This claim, however, is not without dispute as a number of deaf individuals demonstrate evidence of strong
reading skills despite no direct experience with spoken phonology. While the reading achievement levels of these deaf
individuals are evident in the literature, we do not know much about the neuropsychological and neurophysiological bases
for the differences observed in deaf individuals who have strong versus weak reading skills. To address this shortcoming,
we propose to use neuropsychological testing and Event Related Potentials (ERPs) to examine the effects of deafness and
reading levels on the neural substrates serving phonological processes and reading. Thus, the current interdisciplinary
study will collect pilot data in an attempt to 1) differentiate the cognitive, linguistic, and reading profiles of these two
groups of readers, 2) examine the neurophysiological correlates of their phonological processes, and 3) determine the
feasibility of conducting future larger-scale cognitive and neuroimaging studies on adults and children. The results from
this study will have significant implications for the field of deaf education and how teachers conceptualize phonological
skills in deaf readers. The results also will contribute to a better understanding of the cognitive profiles of deaf
undergraduates with reading difficulties or disabilities, and provide the basis for the development of reading interventions
for deaf adults and children.
Goal 1: What are the functional neuropsychological profiles of deaf undergraduate students who have strong
versus weak reading skills? We hypothesize that strong readers will have better developed language and verbal memory
skills, and possibly better developed executive functioning compared with individuals with weaker reading skills. Further,
we will examine the association between these test performances and ERP task-related activity to better understand the
cognitive and linguistic skills needed for successful reading development.
Goal 2: Do deaf undergraduate students who are strong readers recruit the same neural substrates for
phonological processing as do deaf students who are weak readers? Will deaf ASL users with comparable phonological
experiences, but different reading abilities, activate the same neural regions for phonological processing? To address this
aim, we have chosen to evaluate ERPs during a rhyme judgment task because this paradigm has been shown to recruit
traditional phonological processing areas in the brain such as left inferior frontal and parietal regions (Shaywitz, 1998;
McDermott, 2003).
Background Information/Significance
Imaging studies of reading and phonological processes in hearing adults. A number of PET and fMRI studies have
reported consistent findings regarding the neural signature of adult normal reading (Price, et al., 1997; Fiez & Petersen,
1998; Turkeltaub et al., 2002) and phonological processing (Poldrack et al., 1999; Gelfand & Bookheimer, 2003). In the
adult brain, a distributed cortical network is recruited to decode printed words including left lateralized regions of
occipital, ventral temporal, posterior superior temporal, and inferior frontal cortices (Fiez & Petersen, 1988; Turkeltaub et
al., 2002). When a printed word is presented in the visual field of a mature reader, the visual cortex transmits visual
Page 4
information along the ventral occipito-temporal pathway to the left mid-fusiform gyrus. The left superior temporal,
inferior parietal, and dorsal inferior frontal cortical areas are recruited for phonological processing, which involves the
retrieval and assembly of the sound structure of words (Moore & Price, 1999; Dietz, Jones, Gareau, Zeffiro, & Eden,
2005). Regions of the left anterior middle temporal gyrus and the ventral inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) have been implicated
in semantic processing (i.e., the association of meanings with words) (Poldrack et al, 1999). Lesion and functional
connectivity studies have implicated the left inferior parietal cortex in reading (Horwitz, Rumsey, & Donohue, 1998), but
not all brain imaging studies are in concordance with this finding (Fiez & Petersen, 1998; Turkeltaub et al., 2002). This
area may be more involved in a supporting function for reading such as storage of phonological units for online
processing in working memory. Thus, the main areas commonly implicated in reading include the left fusiform gyrus in
the ventral extrastriate cortex, the left superior temporal cortex, and the left IFG. However, the effect of altered sensory
and linguistic experiences on the neural substrates underlying reading and phonological processes remains virtually
unknown.
Imaging studies of Rhyme Judgment. Rhyme judgment tasks (e.g. do queen and dean rhyme?) explicitly require
participants to retrieve and use phonological information, placing greater demands on the neural networks involved in
phonological processing. In light of the fact that visual, orthographic, and semantic processes are implicated during rhyme
judgment tasks, previous neuroimaging studies (e.g., fMRI and PET) have used visual, semantic, and orthographic tasks
as baseline conditions to more specifically isolate the functional neuroanatomy of phonological processing (Poldrack et al,
1999; McDermott et al, 2003; Shaywitz et al., 1998). For example, a visual or orthographic control task might involve
participants judging whether visual features (i.e., //, \\) or letter cases are similar (i.e., B, t, b, T) (Shaywitz et al, 1998)
while a semantic judgment control task might require participants to judge whether two words (i.e., cat-dog) belong in the
same category. Studies employing rhyme judgment and control tasks such as these have found neural activity specific to
phonological processing in the bilateral inferior parietal cortex, posterior portions of the IFG (roughly corresponding to
Brocas area), and bilateral precuneus (McDermott et al., 2003).
Regarding behavioral performance on rhyme judgment tasks, variability has been identified depending on group
affiliation. For instance, in a rhyme judgment experiment comparing hearing and deaf participants, Hanson and Fowler
(1987) demonstrated that prelingually and profoundly deaf adults had significantly more errors in rhyme judgment than
hearing controls, particularly on orthographically similar but phonologically dissimilar word pairs. Although performance
differences are likely to occur across deaf individuals, this task will be a useful measure of phonological awareness in the
current study, and the use of a yes/no button response system will allow us to easily collect performance data.
Event Related Potentials and Reading Processes. While fMRI and PET scan allow one to examine brain activation in
response to specific tasks at the spatial level, it does not provide information regarding the temporal aspects of involved
neurological processes. One way to assess temporal aspects of neurological processes is through the Event Related
Potential (ERP) paradigm. The ERP paradigm allows us to use electroencephalograph (EEG) techniques to measure
continuous brainwave activity (i.e., electrical activity), which reflects post-synaptic potentials (i.e., communication
between neurons). The EEG activity is then recorded at the scalp via surface electrodes and time-locked to specific
stimulus items in the environment. The averaged brain activity linked to stimuli and/or behavioral responses are termed
ERPs. Thus, ERPs enable us to track how the brain processes stimuli with high temporal resolution.
Different types of perceptual and cognitive processes can be indexed by different ERP components depending on
the stimuli and demands of the experiment. One such ERP component is the N400. This is a negative deflection peaking
around 400 ms. The N400 is a scalp negative waveform (or relative negativity) that is typically largest in central and
parietal regions and is associated with how phonemes and words relate to each other. Originally, the N400 was reported as
an ERP component that indexed semantic integration in a sentence (Kutas & Hillyard, 1980). For example, a larger
negative deflection at approximately 400 ms is to be expected to the word car in a sentence like I was eating a car
compared to a sentence like I was cleaning the car. This is because the word car is not a good fit for the first sentence.
However, there have been few ERP studies conducted with deaf adults. In a study examining the processing of
English sentences (Neville, Mills, &Lawson, 1992), deaf adults who learned English late displayed both similar and
nonsimilar ERPs to open class and closed class words respectively. Closed class words (i.e., articles, conjunctions,
auxiliaries) are suggested to support the initial syntactic parsing of sentences while open class words (i.e., nouns, verbs,
Page 5
and adjectives) elicit semantic processing. This suggests that the development of neural systems is vulnerable to different
types of early language experiences. What is not clear from the literature is the neurological effects of deafness on
phonological processing as it relates to reading, especially for individuals whose primary language is ASL.
ERP studies of Rhyme Judgment. Other researchers have examined phonological processes using a rhyme judgment
paradigm (Rugg, 1984; Praamstra and Stegeman, 1993; Shafer et al., 2004). In these paradigms, participants are presented
a phonologically primed (e.g. rhyme) versus unprimed words resulting in the elicitation of an N400 waveform peaking
between 300-600 ms post onset of the second word in the judgment task (Praamstra and Stegeman, 1993).
Grossi, Coch, Coffey-Corina, Holcomb, & Neville (2001) examined N400 to measure phonological awareness
skills in hearing individuals aged 7 to 23 years. Participants were asked to decide whether two written words (i.e., prime-
target) rhymed (e.g., JUICEMOOSE) or not (e.g., CHAIRMOOSE). Results showed that nonrhyming words elicited a
more negative deflection between 360-400 ms. Phonological matching tasks that present written words in prime-target
pairs require that the phonological representation of the prime be retrieved, held in working memory and segmented into
constituents (onset and rhyme). These constituents are held in working memory and possibly rehearsed while the rhyme
constituent of the prime is compared to the rhyme constituent of the target. Shafer et al., (2004) examined these processes
in children and adults by presenting the same (bad-bad or gad-gad) versus different word (or word-like) pairs. The
different word pairs varied in the place of articulation (e.g. bad-gad) and voice-onset time (bell-pell). The participants
were asked to judge whether the second word in the pair was the same or different from the first one. An increased
negative response between 200-300 ms after the second word was observed in the different compared to the same pair.
Shafer and colleagues (2004) describe a neurophysiological model for lexical access using these data. They suggest that
lexical access activates a certain set of neurons when the first word of a word pair is encountered. If the second word is
different from the first, additional neural groups are activated resulting in a greater negativity than if the second word is
the same as the first.
Taken together, ERP studies show that the N400 is reduced in amplitude to related (e.g., phonological) as
compared to unrelated word pairs and the peak latency is sensitive to the point in time at which this difference is noted.
Although the N400 is the most identified component in phonological tasks, several studies have identified earlier
components that are also sensitive to phonological processing. The P200 also has been associated with general
phonological mismatch. A reduced P200 amplitude has been identified for phonologically dissimilar relative to similar
pairs in a target detection task (Barnea & Breznitz, 1998; Liu, Perfetti, & Hart, 2003). This early component is thought to
code early graphic forms that are attended to when reading a word. By contrast, Niznikiewicz and Squires (1996)
obtained an opposite effect, a greater N200 for homophones relative to orthographic controls at 200ms. Although
differences in direction of polarity were found in these studies, the findings suggest that ERP components sensitive to
orthographic and phonological processing can be identified earlier than the N400. Thus comparison of both earlier and
later components is necessary to examine potential differences in phonological processing in deaf adults.
One goal of the present study will be to examine the neurophysiological components underlying phonological
processes in deaf readers using a rhyme judgment task. If phonological processes are relevant to the strong reader, we
predict that this group will demonstrate smaller amplitude N400 and significantly more positive P200 in central and
parietal areas because they rely on English phonology to read compared with weaker readers who do not have the same
quality of access to English phonology.
Gallaudet University priorities addressed by this study. The present study will address Gallaudet University Priorities 2
(Development of English Literacy), 8 (Linguistics of Signed Languages), and 12 (Assessment). The data gleaned from the
neuropsychological assessments and electrophysiological paradigm will inform us about the neuropsychological profiles
and the underlying neurological functions that contribute to the development of strong reading skills in deaf
undergraduate students who communicate using ASL. As there is minimal data regarding the neuropsychological profiles
of strong versus weak reader, the present study, which includes formal ASL measures, will assist educators, psychologists,
and speech/language pathologists in assessing and diagnosing reading difficulties in undergraduate students at Gallaudet
and in the community at large. This information should also translate to the assessment of young deaf children who may
struggle with the acquisition of reading skills. Second, the ERP results from this study will provide us a better
understanding of the neurological mechanisms underlying linguistic (e.g., phonological) processes in deaf adults and how
Page 6
these mechanisms contribute to successful reading experiences. Last, these findings have the potential to support the
development of reading intervention strategies for undergraduate students at Gallaudet University, as well as young deaf
children learning to read.
Methods
Targeted Participant Population. We will recruit approximately 32 deaf undergraduate students from Gallaudet University
and divide them into two groups: 1) strong readers and 2) weak readers based on their ACT scores and
neuropsychological profiles. Participants must have acquired a severe to very profound hearing loss prior to the age of 2
years and communicate primarily through ASL. As it is difficult to ascertain the residual benefits an individual receives
from hearing aids or cochlear implants over their lifetime, individuals using any device or lack thereof will be included in
the study. Participants will be screened to identify those individuals with a positive history for one or more issues that
would preclude them from performing on certain tests in the battery and/or have impacted their learning during early
years of life: intellectual disability, diagnosed learning disability, diagnosed speech or language disorder, neurological
disease (e.g., seizure disorder or major concussion), and/or major psychiatric disorder. Additional exclusionary criteria
will include substance use/abuse or administration of certain medications known to affect cognition and/or EEG activity.
Information regarding language background, including age of language acquisition, will be collected via a questionnaire.
Interested participants who had poor or inconsistent access to language prior to age 6 will be excluded from the study.
Procedures. Participants will be recruited from GU using flyers, classroom announcements, and/or advertisement in the
Daily Digest. Interested individuals will be screened by the Project Coordinator using a demographic/background
questionnaire and their ACT Composite, English and Reading Tests (American College Testing, 2003).
Demographic/background information will include age, gender, ethnicity, handedness, etiology of early deafness, severity
of hearing loss, use of amplification/implant, cultural identification, language background, family hearing status, primary
language during youth, current primary language, household language, years of education, type of education, and primary
mode of instruction. Additionally, individuals will be asked about their learning experiences in elementary, high school,
and college. ACT Composite and reading component scores will be obtained from Gallaudet University with consent and
initially used to divide participants into strong and weak reading groups (i.e., above 20 versus below 16). The ACT
provides useful information regarding deaf student readiness to enter and achieve in college and university settings.
However, a Composite or component score lower than 16, based on a range of standard scores extending from 1 to 36,
does not necessarily provide helpful predictive information regarding those students who have limited English reading
proficiency. Participants meeting the screening criteria will be administered a comprehensive neuropsychological
evaluation that will be divided across two separate sessions. Participants will be reimbursed $15.00/hour for their time.
Neuropsychological measures: Neuropsychological measures will be used to assess cognitive functions

underlying phonological processes (e.g., working memory, lexical retrieval, phonological awareness, and naming fluency)
and reading levels. To meet the needs of deaf individuals in testing situations, the evaluations will be conducted by a
graduate student from the Clinical Doctoral Program at GU who is fluent in ASL, trained in test administration for deaf
individuals, and versed in the linguistic and cultural needs of the population. All assessments will be videotaped to allow
the examiners to view specific portions of the evaluation when necessary to validate responses. All test record forms and
videotapes will be coded with an ID number to maintain confidentiality and protect the identity of the participants. Test
responses and stored data will be kept in a secure locked location by the PI.
The following measures will be administered to each group: 1) Global intelligence -- Wechsler Abbreviated Scale
of Intelligence; 2) Motor -- Grooved Pegboard; 3) Visuospatial and visuoperceptual -- Benton Visual Retention Test, 5th
Edition, The Rey Complex Figure Test (Copy trial); 4) Language -- Boston Naming Test, 2nd Edition, Phoneme Detection
Test (see below); 5) Memory American Sign Language Prose Recall Test (see below), Digit Span (see below), Signed
Verbal Learning Test (see below), The Rey Complex Figure Test (Recall and Recognition Trials), Wechsler Memory
Scale-Fourth Edition (Symbol Span subtest); 6) Executive functioning -- abbreviated Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, Delis-
Kaplan Executive Function System (Verbal Fluency Test and Trail Making Test), Signed Fluency Test (see below); 7)
Reading -- Peabody Individual Achievement Test, Revised; Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency, Woodcock Reading
Page 7
Master Test Revised Normative Update (Passage Comprehension) Woodcock-Johnson III Test of Achievement (Reading
Ability Cluster and Fluency subtests)
American Sign Language Prose Recall Test (Pollard, DeMatteo & Lentz, 2007) is an analogue measure of the
WMS: Logical Memory subtests. Participants watch two separate stories presented in ASL on a computer and recall each
story immediately following the presentation and subsequent to a time delay. Participants will be videotaped during their
recall of the stories and their productions will be rated and scored by the research assistants.
Digit Span (Current investigators) is an analogue measure of the WAIS: Digit Span subtest. The task will be
presented on a computer in QuickTime video. In the video, a deaf individual will present the instructions/stimuli in ASL.
Not only will this maintain consistency in rate and delivery of stimulus items, but eye-contact between the presenter and
the participant, a very important element of face-to-face communication in deaf populations, is preserved throughout the
stimulus presentation.
Phoneme Detection Test (Current investigators) is a test of phonemic awareness. Many current
neuropsychological measures of phonological skill are unsuitable for deaf populations and we will be employing a non-
verbal phonemic detection test (Koo, Crain, LaSasso, & Eden, 2008). Instead of verbalizing the phonological composition
of a given word, this test allows participants to indicate with yes/no responses whether written word-items have a target
phoneme (i.e., is there a /k/ in cat?). One-hundred fifty high-frequency words-items are presented in 5 different lists
according to target phonemes found in certain orthographic representations. Stimulus items are presented using
Presentation software, which also records accuracy and RT for behavioral analysis.
Signed Verbal Learning Test is a signed analogue of the CVLT. It addresses the impact of formational
characteristics of signs that are comparable to the phonetic impacts of word recall on the CVLT. This task will be
presented on a computer in QuickTime video. In the video, a deaf individual will present the instructions/stimuli in ASL.
Signed Fluency Test (Current investigator) is a signed analogue of the D-KEFS Verbal Fluency Test. The
difference between F-A-S and 5-1-U is that in the former the participant is using English phonemes and an alphabetic
strategy and in the latter, ASL phonemes and a handshape strategy. Participants will be asked to generate as many signs as
possible that begin with the ASL manual handshapes (i.e., phonemes) representing the letter U, the number 1, and the
closed-hand version of the number 5 (also referred to as an open B). The number 1 and closed-hand 5 are the highest
frequency phonemes (Morford & MacFarlane, 2003). The letter U represents a less frequent, but not rare usage,
presenting a more challenging task (Chong, Sankar, & Poor, 2009). Participants will be videotaped during their
productions for rating purposes.
Event-Related Potential task: The ERP task will be piloted on 6 participants who do not undergo
neuropsychological testing. Subsequent to determining that the task paradigm is sufficient, participants in the formal
experiment will be evaluated.
Stimuli: We plan to use a rhyme judgment paradigm which has been known to actively recruit phonological
processing in participants and used in previous neuroimaging studies (Grossi, Coch, Coffey-Corina, Holcomb, & Neville,
2001). Two lists will be formed, each containing 35 pairs of rhyming words (e.g. heat-seat) and 35 pairs of nonrhyming
words (e.g. heat-sweat). Nonrhyming pairs will be formed by associating the prime of a rhyming pair with the target of
another rhyming pair. All the targets will be preceded by the same primes in both rhyming and nonrhyming conditions
across the two lists. The prime-target pairs will be intermixed across the two lists so that each word appears as a target in
only one list. Presentation of the two lists will be counterbalanced across participants.
ERP Procedure: The experiment will be conducted in a 9 x 10 ft sound-proof and electrically-shielded booth.
Visual stimuli will be presented through a 27 computer monitor that is one meter away from the participant. The
sequence of events will be as follows: A visual fixation signal (triangle) will appear at the center of the screen. This will
serve as a warning signal for the beginning of a new trial; 2000 msec after the presentation of the visual fixation (triangle),
the first word (prime) will be presented for 300 msec in the center of the triangle. An interstimulus interval of 876 msec
will precede the presentation of the second word (target); (SOA = 1167 msec). The triangle will disappear 2 seconds after
the target disappears. The experiment will be divided into two blocks, with 35 trials in each block and a short pause
between blocks. The session will be self-paced. The participants will control the onset of the next trial by pressing a
button on a response box. The participants will be instructed to press yes if the two words rhymed and no if they did
not; a third button will be pressed if they could not read the words or missed them for some reason. Participants will be
Page 8
instructed to press the buttons as rapidly as possible without compromising the accuracy of their response. The
participants will be further instructed not to blink or move when the white triangle is shown on the screen. Eight practice
trials will precede the actual test session.
Electrode Placement and Data Recording: Scalp electrodes will be applied using a Geodesic 2.0 dense array
electrical net and Net Station Software version 4.1. The net is comprised of 65 electrodes that are covered with sponges
that are arranged following a 10-20 system (American Electroencephalographic Society, 1994). The application of the
Geodesic electrodes requires less time than individual placement of electrodes as the net ensures proper placement on the
scalp. The sponges will be soaked in a potassium chloride solution to increase conductivity. The impedances of the
electrodes will be maintained below 50 KOhms. Vertical and horizontal electrode montages near the eyes will be used to
monitor eye movement and eye blinks. The recordings will be referenced to the vertex (Cz) electrode during data
acquisition, but changed to an average reference for data analysis. The recordings will be sampled at 250 Hz and then
amplified with a band pass filter of .1 and 30 Hz using a 64-channel Net Amps. During data collection, all the electrodes
will be monitored by the experimenter for any electrical interference, lack of electrode contact to the scalp, or excessive
moving. Eye movements will be monitored from the frontal electrodes.
Data Analysis
Data post-processing. The continuous EEG will be processed off-line, segmented into epochs with an analysis time of
1000 ms post-stimulus and a 200 ms pre-stimulus baseline. Epochs will be baseline corrected, followed by rejection of
any epoch containing electrophysiological activity that exceeds +/- 70 V. The epochs will then be averaged within each
of the stimulus categories. Epochs with artifact greater than 70 microvolts (mostly blinks and eye movements) will be
excluded from the average. Further, channels with more than 15% of epochs with artifacts will be replaced with data
interpolated from the surrounding channels. Similarly, if 15% of the channels have artifacts detected in a certain epoch, it
also will be excluded from the average.
Since the experiment will consist of visual stimuli, some of the trials will be contaminated by eyeblinks and
rejected from the average data for each person. In order to overcome this issue of reduced number of trials, we will
perform an extra process where the data will be subjected to removal of the eyeblinks before averaging the trials. This is a
standard process in the field and will be carried out using the EEGLAB version 3.0 software with a program written by
Delorme and Makeig (2004). Delrorme and Makeigs method of removing eyeblink entails a two-step process 1)
decomposing the raw (unaveraged data) using Independent Component Analysis and then 2) modeling a human eyeblink
from time course and topographical data that are written into a Matlab program. To take advantage of this eyeblink
correction program, we will first segment data from each participant into single trials and processed them for artifact
detection. These data will then be subjected to the Matlab eyeblink correction program and further processed for artifact
detection and bad channel replacement before averaging them. The data, reprocessed using the same specifications
reported earlier, will most likely result in many fewer trials that will be rejected for eyeblinks.
ERP P200 and N400 components. Selection of sites and epochs for statistical analysis with the phonological P200 and
N400 will be guided by previous literature, but also will involve inspecting topographical maps and examining amplitude-
time plots with selected sites based on existent literature. Each ERP component (i.e., P200 and N400) will be labeled
according to its polarity and the mean latency of its peak. The amplitude and latency of each component will be the
dependent variables in subsequent analyses. Amplitude is measured as local peak amplitude or the largest value in a
particular time window relative to the baseline for earlier components. A mean amplitude average over a time window
will be labeled for broader late components. Visual inspection of individual waveforms will be conducted to select the
appropriate time window for each component in the strong vs. weak readers. The following components and time
windows will be used for analyses: P200 (160 300 msec), N400 to primes (300600 msec), CNV to primes (6001167
msec), N350 to targets (200500 msec), and RE (250600 msec). The RE is expressed in difference ERPs formed by
subtracting the rhyming from the nonrhyming condition.
Page 9
Statistical Analyses by Hypothesis

Goal 1: What are the functional neuropsychological profiles of deaf undergraduate students who have strong
versus weak reading skills? We hypothesize that strong readers will have better developed language and verbal memory
skills, and possibly better developed executive functioning compared with individuals with weaker reading skills.
Descriptive statistics will be performed for each measure to better understand the general characteristics of the two
groups. Bonferroni-corrected t-tests will be performed on each measure using Reading Group (strong x weak) as the
between-subject variable.
Subsequent to the analyses for Goal 2, we will explore the association between neuropsychological test
performances and ERP task-related activity to better understand the cognitive and linguistic skills needed for successful
reading development as evidenced by ERP waveform activity. First, we will conduct Pearson correlations between test
performance and ERP task-related activity. Next, regression models will be performed for each ERP waveform using the
neuropsychological data to identify cognitive and linguistic predictors of strong versus weak readers.
Goal 2: Do deaf undergraduate students who are strong readers recruit the same neural substrates for
phonological processing as do deaf students who are weak readers? Will deaf ASL users with comparable phonological
experiences, but different reading abilities, activate the same neural regions for phonological processing? To address this
aim, we have chosen to evaluate ERPs during a rhyme judgment task because this paradigm has been shown to recruit
traditional phonological processing areas in the brain such as left inferior frontal and parietal regions (Shaywitz, 1998;
McDermott, 2003).
For each epoch (both the early P200 and the late N400) the following set of analyses will be carried out. Each
participants electrophysiological responses will be averaged for the time bins being analyzed for each task and site. The
voltage responses to rhyming targets will be statistically compared to that of the non-rhyming targets in an ANOVA of
Task x Site x Time. Interactions and Main effects that are significant at .05 levels or less will be followed with step down
ANOVAs. Two-way significant ANOVAs will be followed with post hoc Tukey HSD tests. To determine the effect of a
phonological (rhyming) mismatch, the ERP data will be examined using a mixed three-way ANOVA. The between-
subjects factor will be reading level (two levels), and the three within-subjects factors will be rhyme (two levels),
hemisphere (two levels), and site (five levels). The GeisserGreenhouse correction index will be applied to all within-
subjects measures with more than one degree of freedom.
We expect that significantly more negative N400 will be elicited for weak readers in central-parietal sites
compared to strong readers indicating poor phonological processing during a rhyming task. Additionally, significantly
more positive P200 will be elicited for strong readers compared to weak readers in central-parietal sites indicating that
strong readers use both phonology and orthography in phonological processing of words.
Based on the findings from the proposed study, we will be able to use the data to apply for external funding
opportunities that allow us to: 1) extend the sample size to include students who communicate using spoken English or
Cued Speech; 2) apply the paradigm to young deaf readers; 3) follow deaf adults and young deaf children as their reading
skills develop; and 4) potentially contribute to the development of reading interventions.
References
1. American College Testing, (2003). ACT assessment user handbook. Iowa City, IA: ACT Corp.
2. American Electroencephalographic Society, (1994). Guideline thirteen: Guidelines for standard electrode position
nomenclature. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology, 11, 111.
3. J. Ashby, (2010). Phonology is fundamental in skilled reading: Evidence from ERPs. Psychometric Bulletin and
Review, 17, 95.
4. A. Barenea & Z. Breznitz, (1998). Phonological and orthographic processing of Hebrew words:
Electrophysiological aspects. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 159, 492.
5. H. Catts & A. Kamhi (Eds.), (2005). The relationships between language and reading disabilities. Mahway, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
6. A. Chong, L. Sankar, & H.V. Poor, (2009). Frequency of occurrence and information entropy of American Sign
Language. Retrieved arxiv.org/pdf/0912.1768 on January 3, 2011.
Page 10
7. R. Conrad, (1979). The deaf school child. London: Harper and Row.
8. A. Delorme & S. Makeig, (2004). EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics.
Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 134, 9.
9. N.A.E. Dietz, K.M. Jones, L. Gareau, T.A. Zeffiro, & G.F. Eden, (2005). Phonological decoding involves left
posterior fusiform cortex. Human Brain Mapping, 26, 81.
10. J.A. Fiez & S.E. Petersen, (1998). Neuroimaging studies of word reading. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Science, 95, 914.
11. J.R. Gelfand & S.Y. Bookheimer, (2003). Dissociating neural mechanisms of temporal sequencing and processing
phonemes. Neuron, 38, 831.
12. G. Grossi, D. Coch, S. Coffey-Corina, P. Holcomb, & H. Neville, (2001). Phonological processing in visual
rhyming: A developmental ERP Study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 13, 610.
13. V.L. Hanson & C.A. Fowler, (1987). Phonological coding in word reading: evidence from hearing and deaf
readers. Memory and Cognition, 15, 199.
14. B. Horwitz, J.M. Rumsey, & B.C. Donohue, (1998). Functional connectivity of the angular gyrus in normal
reading and dyslexia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 95, 8939.
15. M.A. Karchmer, M.N. Milone, Jr., & S. Wolk, (1979). Educational significance of hearing loss at three levels of
severity. American Annals of the Deaf, 124, 97.
16. D. Koo, K. Crain, C. LaSasso, & G. Eden, G. (2008). Phonological awareness and short-term memory in hearing
and deaf individuals of different communication backgrounds. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences,
1145, 83.
17. M. Kutas & S.A. Hillyard, (1980). Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity.
Science, 207, 203.
18. Y. Liu, C.A. Perfetti, & L. Hart, (2003). ERP evidence for the time course of graphic phonological, and semantic
information in Chinese meaning and pronunciation decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Memory and Cognition, 29, 1231.
19. M. Marschark, (2003). Cognitive functioning in deaf adults and children. In Marschark, M. & Spencer, P. (Eds.).
Oxford handbook of deaf studies, language, and education. New York: Oxford University Press.
20. K.B. McDermott et al., (2003). A procedure for identifying regions preferentially activated by attention to
semantic and phonological relations using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Neuropsychologia, 41, 293.
21. C.J. Moore & C.J. Price, (1999). Three distinct ventral occipitotemporal regions for reading and object naming.
NeuroImage, 10, 181.
22. J.P. Morford & J. MacFarlane, (2003). Frequency characteristics of American Sign Language. Sign Language
Studies, 3, 213.
23. H. Neville, D. Mills, & D. Lawson, (1992). Fractioning language: Different neural subsystems with different
sensitive periods. Cerebral Cortex, 2, 244.
24. M. Niznikiewicz & N.K. Squires, (1996). Phonological processing and the role of strategy in silent reading:
Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Brain and Language, 52, 342.
25. R.A. Poldrack et al., (1999). Functional specialization for semantic and phonological processing in the left
inferior prefrontal cortex. Neuroimage, 10, 15.
26. R.Q. Pollard, Jr., A. DeMatteo & E. Lentz (2007). A prose recall test using stories in American Sign Language.
Rehabilitation Psychology, I52, 11.
27. P. Praamstra & D.F. Stegeman, (1993). Phonological effects on the auditory N400. Cognitive Brain Research, 1,
73.
28. C.J. Price, et al., (1997). Segregating semantic from phonological processes during reading. Journal of Cognitive
Neuroscience, 9, 727.
29. S.P. Quigley & P.V. Paul, (1994). Language and deafness. (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group,
Inc.
30. M.D. Rugg, (1984). Event-related potentials in phonological matching tasks. Brain and Language, 23, 225.
31. V.L. Shafer, R.G. Schwartz, & K.L. Kessler, (2004). ERP indices of phonological and lexical processing in
children with SLI. Proceedings of the 28th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 522.
Page 11
32. S.E. Shaywitz, (1998). Functional disruption in the organization of the brain for reading in dyslexia. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences, 95, 2636.
33. P. Tallal, (1980). Auditory temporal perception, phonics, and reading disabilities in children. Brain and
Language, 9, 182.
34. C.B. Traxler, (2000). The Stanford Achievement Test, 9th Edition: National norming and performance standards
for deaf and hard-of-hearing students. Journal of deaf studies and deaf education, 5, 337.
35. P.E. Turkeltaub et al., (2002). Meta-analysis of the functional neuroanatomy of single-word reading: method and
validation. Neuroimage, 16, 765.
Person-Loading Chart: Estimated Number of Hours Needed, by Person, to Complete Specified Task for Proposed
Research Study (2011-2012):
Activity L. Pick D. Koo K. Garrido- Project Research
Nag Coordinator Assistant
Create Stimuli for Rhyme task 10 30 10 0 0
Create Experimental Paradigm on Computer 10 10 30 0 0
Graduate/Undergraduate Student Training: 10 0 60 0 160

Electrophysiology
Graduate Student Training: Neuropsychological Testing 40 0 0 100 0
Development of Data Processing and Database: 10 25 25 0 100

Electrophysiology
Development of Data Processing and Database: 20 10 0 144 0

Neuropsychological Testing
Pilot: Recruitment and Screening of Participants 10 0 0 20 0
Pilot: Experimental Paradigm 0 0 8 0 18
Pilot: Data Analyses: Electrophysiology 20 12 0 18
Recruitment and Screening of Participants 10 0 0 20 0
Data Collection: Neuropsychological Testing 5 0 0 40 0
Data Collection: Electrophysiology 0 0 6 0 12
Data Processing and Entry: Neuropsychological Testing 20 10 0 12 0
Data Processing and Entry: Electrophysiology 0 25 12 0 12
Data Analyses: Neuropsychological Testing 12 25 0 0 0
Data Analyses: Electrophysiology 5 0 0 0 0
Total 162 155 166 316 320

Page 12

Continued Participant Recruitment/Screening 20 0 0 40 0
Data Collection: Neuropsychological Testing 20 0 0 200 0
Data Collection: Electrophysiology 0 0 30 0 60
Data Processing and Entry: Neuropsychological Testing 20 10 0 60 0
Data Processing and Entry: Electrophysiology 0 25 30 0 60
Explore external funding opportunities 15 15 15 0 10
Begin drafting external funding applications (if available 20 20 20 0 0

for 2013)
Draft submissions for presentations and/or publications 10 10 10 0 0
TOTAL 125 130 125 300 170

Final Participant Recruitment/Screening 8 0 0 16 0
Final Data Collection: Neuropsychological Testing 8 0 0 80 0
Final Data Collection: Electrophysiology 0 0 12 0 24
Final Data Processing: Neuropsychological Testing 14 7 0 40 0
Final Data Processing: Electrophysiology 0 12 12 0 24

Page 13
Complete/submit external funding applications 10 10 10 0 0
Continue to draft submissions for presentations and/or 10 10 10 10 0

publications
Disseminate Findings to Gallaudet University community 10 10 10 0 0
TOTAL 95 89 82 136 48
Time-Line for Specified Activities Related to Conducting the Proposed Research from fall 2011-summer 2012
Activity Fall 2011 Spring 2012 Summer 2012
Create Stimuli for Rhyme task X X
Create Experimental Paradigm on Electrophysiology X X

Computer
Pilot Experimental Paradigm X X
Graduate Student Training: Electrophysiology X X
Graduate Student Training: Neuropsychological Testing X X
Development of Data Processing: Electrophysiology X
Development of Data Processing: Neuropsychological Testing X X
Recruitment of Participants X X
Data Collection: Electrophysiology X
Data Collection: Neuropsychological Testing X

Page 14
Continued Participant Recruitment X X X
Continued Data Collection: Electrophysiology X X X
Continued Data Collection: Neuropsychological Testing X X X
Data Processing: Electrophysiology X X X
Data Processing: Neuropsychological Testing X X X
Data Analyses: Electrophysiology X X
Data Analyses: Neuropsychological Testing X X
Explore external funding opportunities X X
Final Participant Recruitment X X
Final Data Collection: Electrophysiology X X
Final Data Collection: Neuropsychological Testing X X
Final Data Processing: Electrophysiology X X
Final Data Processing: Neuropsychological Testing X X
Final Data Analyses: Electrophysiology X X
Final Data Analyses: Neuropsychological Testing X X
Continue: Explore external funding opportunities X
Draft/submit external funding applications (if available for X X

2013)
Draft submissions for presentations and/or publications X X X

Page 15
Projected Budget (2011-2013)

2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014
Lawrence H. Pick (Principal Investigator)
Summer Salary ($7,888 FTE/month x 1 month x 0.5 FTE) 3,944.00 3,944.00 3,944.00
Benefits (@28.5% salary figure) 1,124.00 1,124.00 1,124.00
Daniel Koo (Co-Investigator)

Summer Salary $7,396 FTE/month x 1 month x 0.5 FTE) 3,698.00 3,698.00 3,698.00
Benefits (@28.5% salary figure) 1,053.00 1,053.00 1,053.00
Karen Garrido-Nag (Co-Investigator)

Summer Salary ($6,000 FTE/month x 1 month x 0.5 FTE) 3,000.00 3,000.00 3,000.00
Benefits (@28.5% salary figure) 855.00 855.00 855.00
Project Coordinator (Graduate Research Assistant 1)

Fall/Spring/Summer 2012-2014 4,740.00 5,250.00 1,590.00
Graduate Research Assistant 2

Summers 2012-2014 600.00 600.00 600.00
Subtotal Personnel Costs 19,014.00 19,524.00 15,864.00
Compensation (6 Pilot ERP batteries 1 hour each @ 15.00) 90.00 0.00 0.00
Compensation (Neuropsychological batteries 4 hours each @ 60.00) 240.00 1,200.00 480.00
Compensation (ERP batteries 1 hour each @ 15.00) 150.00 300.00 120.00
Subtotal Participant Compensation 480.00 1,500.00 600.00
Test Kits 1,850.00 0.00 0.00

Test Record Forms 250.00 350.00 150.00
Subtotal Test Materials 2,100.00 350.00 150.00
Net Station Software Subscription/EGI Company 2,500.00 2,500.00 2,500.00

SPSS Registration ($90.00 x 2 units) 180.00 180.00 180.00
External Hard Drive ($200 x 2) 200.00 200.00 0.00
DVDs 35.99 35.99 0.00
Subtotal Technology and Service Contracts 2,915.00 2,915.00 2,680.00
HydroCel Geodesic Sensor Nets 2,950.00 2,950.00 2,950.00

Q-tips ($10.79 x 2) 21.58 21.58 21.58
Towels: ($44.99 x 2) 89.98 89.98 89.98
Detergent ($13.99 x 3) 41.97 41.97 41.97
Potassium Chloride: ($50.00 x 6) 300.00 300.00 300.00
Baby shampoo: ($5.99 x 2 bottles) 12.00 12.00 12.00
Subtotal Equipment 3,415.53 3,415.53 3,415.53
Office Materials (Duplication, Supplies, Mailings) 200.00 200.00 200.00

Subtotal General Office Expenses/Technology 200.00 200.00 200.00
Total Funding Requested 28,124.53 27,904.53 22,909.53
Cost Sharing/In Kind (Departments of Psychology and Hearing, Speech, and Language Sciences)
Graduate Research Assistant 2 (Department of HSLS 2012-2014) 8,070.00; 2 Computers 2,400.00; 3 Monitors 1,200.00; 2 Printers
800.00; Booth ($150.00 x 38 participants) 5,700.00; Camcorder 460.00; Psychology Test Materials 4,230.00; Psychology Testing
Room, Administrative Assistant Support (Department of Psychology and HSLS)
Total Cost Sharing/In Kind 22,860.00
Page 16
BUDJET JUSTIFICATION
Identified Personnel
Principal Investigator: Lawrence Pick, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor of Psychology in the Clinical Doctoral Program at
Gallaudet University. Dr. Pick is clinical neuropsychologist who has over a decade of experience conducting
neuropsychological assessments of deaf children and adults with reading and language disorders. He has experience
conducting EEG and ERP studies for both clinical and research protocols. Dr. Pick will oversee coordination of the
project, training of the Project Coordinator and neuropsychological testing. Dr. Pick is responsible for the planning,
direction, coordination, and administration of the entire project. Dr. Pick will oversee the use of research equipment and
facilities at Gallaudet University. He is responsible for writing reports and scientific papers to emerge from this project.
Co-Investigator: Daniel S. Koo, Ph.D. is currently an Assistant Professor of Psychology in the Undergraduate Program at
Gallaudet University. Previously in Dr. Koos post-doctoral training at Georgetown University, he developed a rhyme
judgment paradigm for an experiment using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) that elicits phonological
processes. He also developed a non-verbal behavioral measure of phonological awareness that will be used in this study.
Dr. Koo will oversee the development of the stimuli and paradigm, as well as data entry, data management, and statistical
analyses. Dr. Koo will also work with undergraduate Psychology interns or honors students who are interested in
observing and learning the neuropsychological and ERP techniques. He is responsible for writing reports and scientific
papers to emerge from this project.
Co-Investigator: Karen Garrido-Nag, MS. is an Instructor at the Hearing, Speech, and Language Sciences Department at
Gallaudet University. Ms. Garrido-Nag managed an RO1 grant entitled, The Neurodevelopmental Bases of Speech
Discrimination, in her doctoral studies that used Electrophysiology as the main methodology. In her capacity as a lab
manager, she assisted in the development of the grant, in creating stimuli, creating various experimental paradigms and
designing ways to analyze data. She has also trained students on the use of electrophysiology. Ms. Garrido-Nag will
oversee the ERP component of the study, training of the research assistant in use of ERP techniques, and ERP data
compression and selection. She is responsible for writing reports and scientific papers to emerge from this project.
Project Coordinator (PC): will be an advanced Gallaudet University Clinical Psychology Doctoral student versed in
neuropsychological assessment, lifespan processes, and deafness. The PC will oversee recruitment, screening, and
retention of participants. The PC will also be responsible for conducting, scoring, and entering neuropsychological data
(under the PIs supervision).
Graduate Research Assistant (GRA): The individual will be from the Speech and Language Masters Program at
Gallaudet University and will be fluent in ASL and familiar with deaf individuals. The GRA will be trained in ERP
techniques during the 1st months of the grant. S/he will be responsible for conducting the ERP pilot study and the ERP
experimental portion of the study, as well as compression and entry of the data (under the Co-PIs supervision).
Participant Compensation. Each participant will be compensated for 5 hours of participation (e.g., 1 hour = background
questionnaire and screening, 3 hours = neuropsychological testing, and 1 hour = ERP study) at a rate of 15.00/hour.
Testing Materials and Record Forms. Testing kits not available in the Psychology Department Library must be
purchased to assess reading skills. Test record forms must be purchased annually according to copyright law.
Technology and Service Contracts. The Net Station Software must be renewed/updated annually for purposes of ERP
data compression/analysis. The SPSS license must be renewed annually for purposes of data analyses. Large capacity
hardware is required for storing raw and processed electrophysiological data. An external hard drive is the most common
device to store data to avoid using up the computer memory space so that the computer will not run slowly, and to avoid
confusion of data with other projects. Each participants data needs to be stored in DVDs for back-up. Each participant
Page 17
will require three DVDs for each session (1 for the raw data, 1 for the video recording of the session and the other for
analyzed data).
Equipment is required for the application and maintenance of the ERP nets, and cleaning the participants head
subsequent to the completion of the experiment.
Cost Sharing/In Kind. The investigators and/or HSLS/Psychology Department will be providing approximately
$23,000.00 worth of materials, equipment, and space for this project. The Brain and Language Laboratory in the HSLS
Department and the Psychology Department Testing Rooms are well equipped to perform the proposed research. The
Brain and Language lab is equipped with software and hardware to test and process data designed specifically for
electrophysiology. The lab has state of the art equipment and software for stimulus delivery, experimental control, data
acquisition, and processing. There is access to computers and software necessary to design, implement and process data
for different types of experiments such as electrophysiology and behavioral measures. Sufficient space in the Department
of Psychology is available for participant testing, data management, and secure record keeping.
Page 18
ABBREVIATED CURRICULUM VITAE
Lawrence H. Pick
Gallaudet University
Department of Psychology
Lawrence.pick@gallaudet.edu
Education
1992 B.A. with Honors in Psychology and Linguistics, The University of Massachusetts
1997-1998 APA-approved internship: Clinical psychology & neuropsychology, North Shore University Hospital
2002 Ph.D. in Neuropsychology, Graduate School and University Center of the City University of New York
2003-2004 Postdoctoral training in neuropsychology and deafness, Mill Neck Organization
Positions and Employment

1994-1998 Research Assistant, Neurology Department, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, NY
1994-1997 Clinical Associate, Comprehensive Epilepsy Center, Cornell Medical Center-NY Hospital, NY
2002-2008 Assistant Professor Lecturer, Department of Psychology, Queens College, NY
2004-Present Private Practice (Clinical Neuropsychologist), NY
2005-2007 Project Director, New York Citizens' Committee on Health Care Decisions, NY
2009-Present Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, Gallaudet University, Washington DC
Professional Affiliations and Activities

American Psychological Association (Committee on Disabilities Issues in Psychology; Division 40 Program
Committee); International Neuropsychological Society; National Academy of Neuropsychology (Education
Committee; Program Committee); New York Neuropsychology Group (Elected Board Member/Treasurer)
Journal Review (Editorial Review Board)

2009-Present Journal of the American Deafness and Rehabilitation Association
Journal Review (ad hoc)

Child Neuropsychology; Journal of Abnormal Psychology; Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education;
Neuropsychologia; Neuropsychology; Psychological Bulletin; The Clinical Neuropsychologist
Grant Review (ad hoc)

2007-Present PSC-CUNY Research Awards, Research Foundation of CUNY, NY
Awards and Honors (select)

1995-1998 Graduate Fellowship, City University of New York, NY
1996 Award for Excellence in Scientific Presentation, Division of Clinical Neuropsychology,
American Psychological Association
2008 Featured Poster Presentation, International Neuropsychological Society
2008 Award for Excellence in Scientific Presentation, Division of Clinical Neuropsychology,
American Psychological Association
Selected (from an n=24) peer-reviewed publications (in chronological order).

1. Bloom, R., Borod, J., Santschi-Haywood, C., Pick, L., & Obler, L. (1996). Left and right hemispheric
contributions to discourse coherence and cohesion. International Journal of Neuroscience, 88, 125-140.
2. Halperin, J.M., Newcorn, J.H., Koda, V.H., Pick, L., McKay, K.E., & Knott, P. (1997). Noradrenergic
mechanisms in ADHD children with and without reading disability: A replication and extension. Journal of the
American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 36, 1688-1697.
Page 19
3. Bloom, R.L., Pick, L.H., Borod, J.C., Rorie, K.D., Andelman, F., Obler, L.K., Sliwinski, M., Campbell, A.L.,
Tweedy, J.R., & Welkowitz, J. (1999). Psychometric aspects of verbal pragmatic ratings. Brain and Language,
68, 553-565.
4. Grunwald, I.S., Borod, J.C., Obler, L.K., Erhan, H.M., Pick, L.H., Welkowitz, J., Madigan, N.K., Sliwinski, M.,
& Whalen, J. (1999). The effects of age and gender on the perception of lexical emotion. Applied
Neuropsychology, 6(4), 226-238.
5. Harden, C.L., Lazar, L.M., Pick, L.H., Nikolov, B., Goldstein, M.A., Carson, D., Ravdin, L.D., Kocis, J.H., &
Labar, D.R. (1999). A beneficial effect on mood in partial epilepsy patients treated with gabapentin. Epilepsia,
4(8), 1129-1134.
6. Pick, L.H., Halperin, J.M., Schwartz, S.T. & Newcorn, J.H. (1999). A longitudinal study of neurobiological
mechanisms in boys with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: Preliminary findings. Biological Psychiatry,
45(3), 371-373.
7. Borod, J.C, Rorie, K.D., Pick, L.H., Bloom, R.L., Andelman, F., Campbell, A.L., Obler, L.K., Tweedy, J.R.,
Welkowitz, J., & Sliwinski, M. (2000). Verbal pragmatics following unilateral stroke: Emotional content and
valence. Neuropsychology, 14(1), 112-124.
8. Pick, L.H. (2002). Lexical expression of emotion in cortical stroke patients: intra- and interhemispheric effects.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Graduate Center of the City University of New York, New York.
9. Pick, L.H., Meltzer, E., & Borod, J.C. (In Press). Neuropsychology of Emotion Recognition. In H. Pashler (Ed.),
Encyclopedia of the Mind. SAGE Publications, Inc: New York.
Research Support
Active
Role: Co-Investigator (Principal Investigator: Judith Lauterstein, Ph.D.)
Title: Deaf home health aide training program
Year: 2009-2011
Agency: Buffett Sunshine Lady Foundation, Inc.
Summary: This award addresses the medical and mental health needs of aging deaf and deafblind individuals, and
provides training to deaf home health aides regarding the specific needs of these populations.
Completed
Role: Co-Principal Investigator (Principal Investigator: Beatrice Greenbaum, Ph.D.)
Title: Helping the deaf make informed decisions for advance care planning
Year: 2005-2007
Agency: The Fan Fox & Leslie R. Samuels Foundation Inc.
Summary: This project examined the knowledge and experiences of aging deaf adults regarding advance care
planning. Educational workshops were provided to deaf seniors.
Role: Co-Investigator (Principal Investigator: Cynthia Harden, M.D.)

Title: Impact of lamotrigine on mood and anxiety in patients with epilepsy.
Year: 1996-1998
Agency: Glaxo-Wellcome
Summary: This study examined the effects of a novel anticonvulsant on intelligence, personality, and mood in
patients with partial-complex seizures.
Role: Co-Investigator (Principal Investigator: Cynthia Harden, M.D.)

Title: Effects on mood and anxiety in epileptic patients treated with gabapentin.
Year: 1995-1997
Agency: Parke-Davis
Summary: This award supported the investigation of mood enhancement in epileptic patients using a novel
agent, gabapentin, as an add-on therapy to existing medication regiments.
Page 20
Daniel S. Koo, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology
Gallaudet University
800 Florida Ave NE Washington, DC 20002
Phone: (202) 250-2279 Cell: (301) 944-9040 Fax: (202) 651-5747
E-mail: Daniel.Koo@Gallaudet.edu
Education Ph.D. University of Rochester, Rochester, NY. March 2003, Brain and Cognitive Sciences,
Advisor: Dr. Ted Supalla
Dissertation: On the nature of phonological representation and processing strategies in deaf cuers of
English
M.A. University of Rochester, Rochester, NY. October 2002, Brain and Cognitive Sciences,
Advisor: Dr. Ted Supalla
Thesis: Tracking eye movements in American Sign Language
M.A. Gallaudet University, Washington, D.C. May 1997, ASL Linguistics,

Advisor: Dr. Scott Liddell
Thesis: Structure of determiner phrases in American Sign Language
B.A. University of Maryland, College Park, MD. December 1994, Double Major: English and Sociology
Research Experience
2008 2010 Principal Investigator: Effect of language and communication mode on the neural substrates of
phonological processing. Visual Language Visual Learning Grant. Collaborators: Dr. Guinevere
Eden & Dr. Carol LaSasso
2003 2008 Post-doctoral fellowship: Functional MRI in reading and phonological processes in deaf populations.
Supervisor: Dr. Guinevere Eden
2000 2003 Doctoral dissertation: Phonological representation and processing strategies in deaf cuers of English.
Supervisor: Dr. Ted Supalla.
1997 2000 Pre-dissertation: Tracking eye movements during on-line sign language processing.
Supervisor: Dr. Ted Supalla
1996 1997 Independent Research: Acquisition of verb agreement in native and non-native ASL users.
Supervisor: Dr. Carol Erting
1995 - 1997 Research Assistant and Lab manager: Language Literacy and Culture. Supervisor: Dr. Carol Erting.
Grant Support
2008- 2010 Effect of language and communication mode on the neural substrates of phonological processing
Visual Language Visual Learning Science of Learning Center Grant
2005-2008 Reading and Phonology in Deaf Cuers: An fMRI study Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service
Award from National Institute of Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (F32-
DC007774-03)
Selected Publications
Koo, D., Maisog, J., LaSasso, C., Crain, K., Eden, G. (in preparation) The effect of early sensory and language experience
on the functional neuroanatomy of single word reading.
Weisberg, J., Koo, D., Crain, K.L., Eden, G.F. (submitted) Cortical plasticity for visuospatial processing and object
recognition in deaf and hearing signers. NeuroImage
Page 21
Koo, D., Crain, K., LaSasso, C., Eden, G. (2010). Phonological awareness and short-term memory in hearing and deaf
individuals of different communication backgrounds. In C. LaSasso, K. Crain, & J. Leybaert (Eds.) Advances in Cued
Speech and Cued Language for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children. Plural Publishing
Koo, D. and Supalla, T. (2010). Psycholinguistic study of phonological processes in deaf adult cuers. In C. LaSasso, K.
Crain, & J. Leybaert (Eds.) Advances in Cued Speech and Cued Language for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children.
Plural Publishing
Allen, T., Clark, D., Giudice, A., Koo, D., Lieberman, A., Mayberry, R. and Miller, P. (2009). Phonology and Reading:
A response to Wang, Trezek, Luckner, and Paul. American Annals of the Deaf, Vol. 154, No. 4, 338-345.
Koo, D., Crain, K., LaSasso, C., Eden, G. (2008). Phonological awareness and short-term memory in hearing and deaf
individuals of different communication backgrounds. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1145, 83-99.
Koo, D. (1997). Structure of Determiners in ASL Gallaudet University
Communication Forum. Vol. 6.
Peer Review
Ad Hoc peer reviewer: Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education
World Englishes
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Honors and Awards

Runner-up- Georgetown University 20th Annual Student Research Days Competition Post-Doctoral Division
(Spring 2006)
Graduate President's Scholar. Gallaudet University. (Fall 1996 and Spring 1997)
Dean's List. College of Behavioral and Social Sciences and College of Arts and Humanities. University of Maryland,
College Park. (Fall 1994)
Alpha Kappa Delta, National Honor Society for Sociology majors (1994-1995)
Sigma Tau Delta, International English Honor Society (1994-1995)
Elsie Bell Grosvenor Scholarship (1994)
Office of Multi-Ethnic Student Education Honor Roll of Academic Excellence. University of Maryland, College Park.
(1994)
Womens Club of Potomac Scholarship (1990)
Auditory Senior of the Year Award (1990)
Page 22
ABBREVIATED CURRICULUM VITAE
KAREN GARRIDO-NAG
Hearing, Speech and Language Sciences (202) 448-6964 (W)
Gallaudet University (703) 341-9097 (C)
800 Florida Ave, NE kgarrido.nag@gmail.com
Washington D.C. 20002
EDUCATION
THE GRADUATE CENTER, CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK, New York
Doctoral Candidate, 2002-present
GALLAUDET UNIVERSITY, Washington, DC
Master of Science, Speech-Language Pathology, May 1997
UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES, Manila
Bachelor of Science with Thesis, Speech Pathology, March 1993
POSITIONS AND EMPLOYMENT

2008- present Lecturer, Hearing, Speech and Language Sciences Department, Gallaudet University, Washington
D.C.
2004-2007 Lab Manager, Developmental Neurolinguistics Lab, The Graduate Center, CUNY, New York
2000-2004 Research Assistant, Developmental Neurolinguistics Lab, The Graduate Center, CUNY, New York
2005 (Summer) Adjunct Professor, University of Cincinnati (on-line), NY, NY
(Spring) Adjunct Professor, Lehman College, City University of New York, NY
2004 (Fall) Adjunct Professor, Marymount Manhattan College, New York, NY
1999-2004 Speech-Language Pathologist, CCC-SLP, TheraCare Rehabilitative Services, New York, NY
1998-1999 Speech-Language Pathologist, CCC-SLP, Los Angeles County of Education, Los Angeles, CA
1997-1998 Clinical Fellow in Speech-Language Pathology, University of California in Los Angeles,
Neuropsychiatric Institute, Westwood Plaza, CA
PUBLICATIONS
Shafer, V., Schwartz, R., Datta, H., Garrido-Nag, K., Hestvik, A., Hisagi, M., Yu, Y., (2009). Automaticity of Second
Language Speech Perception in Bilingual Children and Adults. GURT, Implicit and Explicit Conditions, Processes, and
Knowledge in SLA and Bilinguals. Proceeding Manual.
Shafer, V., & Garrido, K. (December 2006). The Neurodevelopmental Bases of Language. Handbook of Language
Development, Erika Hoff and Marilyn Shatz (Eds.).
Garrido, K., Hisagi, M. & Shafer, V. (in preparation). ERP Indices of Speech Processing in Bilinguals.
CONFERENCE PRESENTATIONS
Shafer, V., Schwartz, R., Datta., H. Garrido-Nag, K., Hestvik, A., Tessel, C., Vidal-Finnerty, N., & Yu, Y (2010) Brain
correlates of speech perception in language impaired vs. bilingual children, The Annual Conference of ASHA at
Philadelphia (talk)
Shafer, V. Garrido-Nag, K., &Yu, Y (2010). Neurophysiological correlates of speech perception in infants and young
children: Development and language experience, International Clinical Phonetics and Linguistics Association at Oslo,
Norway, (talk)
Garrido, K., Schwartz, R. & Shafer, V.L. (2010). The Effects of Attention of the Speech Perception of Infants, Annual
Conference of Cognitive Neuroscience Society at Montreal, Canada (poster)
Garrido-Nag, K., Strange, W., Schwartz, R., & Shafer, V. (2009), Attention and Speech Processing in Infants, The Annual
Conference of ASHA at New Orleans (talk)
Shafer, V., Datta., H. Garrido-Nag, K., Hestvik, A., Hisagi, M., & Yu, Y (2009). Brain Bases of Speech Discrimination in
Monolinguals & Bilinguals: Developmental Perspectives, Georgetown University Table at Washington, DC (talk)
Garrido-Nag, K., Yan, Yu, & Shafer, V. (2007). ERP Indices of Speech Processing in Infants and Toddlers: Maturational
Page 23
Changes from 3 months to 7 years of age, Annual Conference of Cognitive Neuroscience Society at New York, NY
(poster)
Garrido-Nag, K., Hisagi, M., & Shafer, V. (2006), Brain Bases of Language Acquisition in Monolinguals & Bilinguals,
Annual Conference of ASHA entitled at Boston, MA (2006)
Garrido, K., Hisagi, M. & Shafer, V.L. (2005). ERP Indices of Vowel Processing in Bilinguals. 5th International
Symposium on Bilingualism (ISB5) at Barcelona, Spain. March 20-23, 2005. (paper)
Garrido, K., Hisagi., M., & Shafer, V.L. (2005). ERP indices of speech processing in Spanish-English Bilinguals. The
12th Annual Cognitive Neurosciences Society (CNS). Meeting at New York, April 10-13. (poster)
Datta, H., Garrido, K., & Shafer, V.L. (2005). The functional significance of the Mismatch Response in Infants. The 12th
Annual Cognitive Neurosciences Society (CNS). Meeting at New York, April 10-13. (poster)
Garrido, K., Hisagi, M., & Shafer, V.L. (2004). ERP indices of speech processing in bilinguals. 147th Meeting of the
Acoustic Society of America, New York, New York, May 24-28. (poster)
Garrido, K., Shafer, V.L., Schwartz, R.G., & Francis, A. (2003). ERP correlates of pitch discrimination in English adults.
8th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Society, New York, March, 2003 (poster)
Datta, H., Garrido, K., MacRoy, M., McDonald, T., & Neumann, Y. (2003). Event Related Potentials: A Tool for the
Future. The Annual Conference of ASHA Chicago, IL (2003). (talk)
Garrido, K., Shafer, V.L., Schwartz, R.G., & Francis, A. (2002). Neurophysiological Indices of Pitch Rise and Fall
Neurophysiological Indices of Tones. Annual Conference of ASHA, Atlanta, Ga. November. (poster)
UNIVERSITY SERVICE
SLP CURRICULM REVISION COMMITTEE, co-chair, Gallaudet University, current
RESEARCH LAB COMMITTEE, member, Gallaudet University, current
ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE, member, Gallaudet University, current
FACULTY SEARCH COMMITTEE, member, Gallaudet University, current

Priority Grant 2011 Final

Cargado por

Información del documento

Título original

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Priority Grant 2011 Final

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Priority Grant Application 2011

Pick, Koo, & Garrido-Nag

Cognitive and Electrophysiological Correlates of

Gallaudet Research Institute

Principal Investigator: Lawrence H. Pick, Ph.D.,

Co-Investigator: Daniel S. Koo, Ph.D.,

Co-Investigator: Karen Garrido-Nag, M.Phil, M.S.,

Neuropsychological measures: Neuropsychological measures will be used to assess cognitive functions

Statistical Analyses by Hypothesis

Create Stimuli for Rhyme task 10 30 10 0 0

Create Experimental Paradigm on Computer 10 10 30 0 0

Graduate/Undergraduate Student Training: 10 0 60 0 160

Graduate Student Training: Neuropsychological Testing 40 0 0 100 0

Development of Data Processing and Database: 10 25 25 0 100

Development of Data Processing and Database: 20 10 0 144 0

Pilot: Recruitment and Screening of Participants 10 0 0 20 0

Pilot: Experimental Paradigm 0 0 8 0 18

Pilot: Data Analyses: Electrophysiology 20 12 0 18

Recruitment and Screening of Participants 10 0 0 20 0

Data Collection: Neuropsychological Testing 5 0 0 40 0

Data Collection: Electrophysiology 0 0 6 0 12

Data Processing and Entry: Neuropsychological Testing 20 10 0 12 0

Data Processing and Entry: Electrophysiology 0 25 12 0 12

Data Analyses: Neuropsychological Testing 12 25 0 0 0

Data Analyses: Electrophysiology 5 0 0 0 0

Total 162 155 166 316 320

Activity L. Pick D. Koo K. Garrido- Project Research

Continued Participant Recruitment/Screening 20 0 0 40 0

Data Collection: Neuropsychological Testing 20 0 0 200 0

Data Collection: Electrophysiology 0 0 30 0 60

Data Processing and Entry: Neuropsychological Testing 20 10 0 60 0

Data Processing and Entry: Electrophysiology 0 25 30 0 60

Data Analyses: Neuropsychological Testing 20 40 0 0 0

Data Analyses: Electrophysiology 0 40 20 0 0

Explore external funding opportunities 15 15 15 0 10

Begin drafting external funding applications (if available 20 20 20 0 0

Draft submissions for presentations and/or publications 10 10 10 0 0

TOTAL 125 130 125 300 170

Activity L. Pick D. Koo K. Garrido- Project Research

Final Participant Recruitment/Screening 8 0 0 16 0

Final Data Collection: Neuropsychological Testing 8 0 0 80 0

Final Data Collection: Electrophysiology 0 0 12 0 24

Final Data Processing: Neuropsychological Testing 14 7 0 40 0

Final Data Processing: Electrophysiology 0 12 12 0 24

Data Analyses: Neuropsychological Testing 30 20 0 0 0

Data Analyses: Electrophysiology 5 20 30 0 0

Complete/submit external funding applications 10 10 10 0 0

Continue to draft submissions for presentations and/or 10 10 10 10 0

Disseminate Findings to Gallaudet University community 10 10 10 0 0

Activity Fall 2011 Spring 2012 Summer 2012

Create Stimuli for Rhyme task X X

Create Experimental Paradigm on Electrophysiology X X

Pilot Experimental Paradigm X X

Graduate Student Training: Electrophysiology X X

Graduate Student Training: Neuropsychological Testing X X

Development of Data Processing: Electrophysiology X

Development of Data Processing: Neuropsychological Testing X X

Data Collection: Electrophysiology X

Data Collection: Neuropsychological Testing X

Continued Participant Recruitment X X X

Continued Data Collection: Electrophysiology X X X

Continued Data Collection: Neuropsychological Testing X X X

Data Processing: Electrophysiology X X X