Has anyone read this new study?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Beowulf said:
My favorite post. A HECK of a lot of reading was needed, but well worth it.
Click to expand...
Many on this thread have been poo poohing the study as being biased because it was done by Dr. Geers, well if we are talking about being biased than there is also bias in this post and all articles mentioned since all respondents sited were tied to the deaf community or work with it. We will not know the full implications of this study until it has been subject to peer review follow up studies to either confirm or debunk it and it will have to be done by people who have no pre-conceived bias toward the subject and that will be the hard part.
 
seb said:
Many on this thread have been poo poohing the study as being biased because it was done by Dr. Geers, well if we are talking about being biased than there is also bias in this post and all articles mentioned since all respondents sited were tied to the deaf community or work with it. We will not know the full implications of this study until it has been subject to peer review follow up studies to either confirm or debunk it and it will have to be done by people who have no pre-conceived bias toward the subject and that will be the hard part.
Click to expand...
"Bias in this post?" Whose? "All respondents sited (sic) were tied to the deaf community or work with it." ALL??? "We will not know the full implications of this study until it has been subject to peer review follow up studies to either confirm it or debunk it and it will have to be done by people who have no pre-conceived bias toward the subject and that will be the hard part." What in God's name is your opinion of peer review????
My head, it is spinning. Lol
 
Cappy said:
They use a Magic 8 Ball.
Click to expand...
Hah. All kidding aside, there apparently is no respect for "professional opinion" if you have been following this thread. Unless it conforms to yours.
 
Beowulf said:
"Bias in this post?" Whose? "All respondents sited (sic) were tied to the deaf community or work with it." ALL??? "We will not know the full implications of this study until it has been subject to peer review follow up studies to either confirm it or debunk it and it will have to be done by people who have no pre-conceived bias toward the subject and that will be the hard part." What in God's name is your opinion of peer review????
My head, it is spinning. Lol
Click to expand...
There lively hood depends on it staying the way it is, so yes, they are biased. Peer review with this one is going to be tough since those dealing with the deaf community have their pre conceived ideas as to how to deal with these children and those trying to find out the best way to treat those very young children who receive CI's are facing a hostile crowd who won't believe any study unless it agrees with their opinion.
 
seb said:
There lively hood depends on it staying the way it is, so yes, they are biased. Peer review with this one is going to be tough since those dealing with the deaf community have their pre conceived ideas as to how to deal with these children and those trying to find out the best way to treat those very young children who receive CI's are facing a hostile crowd who won't believe any study unless it agrees with their opinion.
Click to expand...
Hey, okay. More power to you. I am serious. We may have differences but I want a family.
 
seb said:
There lively hood depends on it staying the way it is, so yes, they are biased. Peer review with this one is going to be tough since those dealing with the deaf community have their pre conceived ideas as to how to deal with these children and those trying to find out the best way to treat those very young children who receive CI's are facing a hostile crowd who won't believe any study unless it agrees with their opinion.
Click to expand...
AND the oralists are VERY closely tied to the hearing devices and speech therapy industry which is FIXTATED that the ONLY "right" path is the " healthy normal" hearing path. Just as there's a LOT of uncomfortable links with doctors and Big Pharma, there are also a lot of uncomfortable links with audis, ENTs, speech therapists and hearing device companies. They are convinced that parents have all this extra cash lying around to spend on the best of the best hearing devices, speech therapists, fights to get into oral schools etc. THAT is why they promote exclusive hearing device usage. It is a BIG business
 
Teacherofthedeaf said:
I'm sorry, I must have missed it. I saw where you said that the premise of AVT (auditory brain development) was disproven, but I didn't see where you had a follow up or proof of that.
Click to expand...
Um this article which says that hearing babies learn spoken language by lipreading? AVT severely discourages lipreading believing that the most important aspect of learning spoken language is sound. But since hearing babies learn spoken language by lipreading, that pretty much disproves the theory of AVT. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/infants-lip-read-learn-speech/story?id=15371023 https://www.speechbuddy.com/blog/la...ps-how-babies-learn-to-speak-by-watching-you/ It's not just about sound....if it was, then you wouldn't have a career. You'd be an AVT.
 
seb said:
It could also be the opposite too. When I first read the study it came off as pretty much common sense to me that the kids who signed the least would do the best on word rec scores and language skills.
Click to expand...
Um no. That's a myth. My TOD friends say they see situtions like very oral kids not having the best spoken language, and kids who Sign having a flair for speech. That's like saying that someone who is weak in math skills will "catch up" by ignoring their strengh in English, and only concentrating on their math skill defiects.
 
deafdyke said:
Um no. That's a myth. My TOD friends say they see situtions like very oral kids not having the best spoken language, and kids who Sign having a flair for speech. That's like saying that someone who is weak in math skills will "catch up" by ignoring their strengh in English, and only concentrating on their math skill defiects.
Click to expand...

Here you go with hearsay and opinion again please provide documented cases backing up your claims.
 
deafdyke said:
AND the oralists are VERY closely tied to the hearing devices and speech therapy industry which is FIXTATED that the ONLY "right" path is the " healthy normal" hearing path. Just as there's a LOT of uncomfortable links with doctors and Big Pharma, there are also a lot of uncomfortable links with audis, ENTs, speech therapists and hearing device companies. They are convinced that parents have all this extra cash lying around to spend on the best of the best hearing devices, speech therapists, fights to get into oral schools etc. THAT is why they promote exclusive hearing device usage. It is a BIG business
Click to expand...

When you have someone doing a study on CI and the use of sign language or how much sign they use and the development of language skills, they would almost have to be tied in with the hearing devices and speech therapy industry. The author of the study has degrees in Developmental Psychology, Social Psychology and Educational Psychology, nowhere did I find any degrees in speech therapy.
 
seb said:
Here you go with hearsay and opinion again please provide documented cases backing up your claims.
Click to expand...
Hey, you got a peer review. Why knock it?
 
Beowulf said:
Hey, you got a peer review. Why knock it?
Click to expand...
But what is her PhD in and where is her paper backing up her claims? "My TOD friends say," doesn't constitute a peer review.
 
seb said:
But what is her PhD in and where is her paper backing up her claims? "My TOD friends say," doesn't constitute a peer review.
Click to expand...
Never mind. I was going to split hairs regarding peers and scientific consensus, but I don't want to become a bigger ass.
I assure you that you have my utmost respect.
 
Beowulf said:
Never mind. I was going to split hairs regarding peers and scientific consensus, but I don't want to become a bigger ass.
I assure you that you have my utmost respect.
Click to expand...

I know where you were coming and going with it and decided to play along.
 
seb said:
Many on this thread have been poo poohing the study as being biased because it was done by Dr. Geers, well if we are talking about being biased than there is also bias in this post and all articles mentioned since all respondents sited were tied to the deaf community or work with it. We will not know the full implications of this study until it has been subject to peer review follow up studies to either confirm or debunk it and it will have to be done by people who have no pre-conceived bias toward the subject and that will be the hard part.
Click to expand...
This study was peer reviewed before it was published.
 
deafdyke said:
How do you know she doesn't get kickbacks? There's a LOT of scummy practices in the medical world today, and the world of hearing devices is not immune from that.
Click to expand...
This meets the definition of libel. You are defaming her with absolutely no proof.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top