Research about teenagers with CI

[shel90]

Ihave to agree with you on this point: small sample size. It will generally be note in published results that findings are not generalizable to an entire population due to small sample size. What that means is, while the hypothesis was supported in this study, chances are significant that it will not be supported in a more respresentative sample.

Oh..I didnt notice the sample size...only 29? That's pretty small!

 

[flip]

I admit it is fascinating to see that Rick and Drew's Dad are so suspicious to a single university. But from my understanding, universities have some norms, and they are scientific. It's new to me that there are missons, like ASL militia or training CI assassins. So I am not going to follow this dicussion further.

You both seems like involving and interested fathers, and that's great. My point here is that parents do not need concealed advertisement. It's often hard enough for parents to make choices about their deaf kids. Parents and kids deserves honest and clear information, free from interests in money or based on prejudices or personal agendas. I hope we all can agree on that one.

If ASL was used instead of CI in this brochure, I would have reacted in the same manner.

 

[R2D2]

Oh..I didnt notice the sample size...only 29? That's pretty small!

That's partly because the population (the total number of teenagers with CIs) is small as well. I notice in the methodology of the study description they said they selected a population (about 128) at random and then wrote to them all asking them to participate in the study. 33 responded. That response rate is pretty average/typical for surveys like this - most people simply aren't interested or bothered about participating in research.

More studies have to be done to build up a body of research that will lend itself to a particular hypothesis. The problem is with voluntary studies is that usually only people will strong feelings will respond e.g. I really love/hate my CI and want to tell everyone about it. Those who are just chugging on and getting on with their lives don't really care.

For those interested I've quoted the section where they describe the way they conducted the survey:

Details of study

The group
The group members came from two major paediatric cochlear implant
programmes in the UK – Nottingham Cochlear Implant Programme and
the South of England Cochlear Implant Programme. We chose 128 young
people at random and invited them to be part of the study. We received
33 positive responses (26%) and interviewed 29 of the 33. Responses
being returned late and tight timescales prevented the final four interviews
taking place. No young person was left out because of extra difficulties
they would present.

The research
The interviews were carried out by an experienced teacher of the deaf
who was not connected with either implant programme and did not know
the young people. Those interviewed were asked how they would prefer
to communicate (speech, speech and signs or BSL), and the interview
took account of this.

 

[shel90]

That's partly because the population (the total number of teenagers with CIs) is small as well. I notice in the methodology of the study description they said they selected a population (about 128) at random and then wrote to them all asking them to participate in the study. 33 responded. That response rate is pretty average/typical for surveys like this - most people simply aren't interested or bothered about participating in research.

More studies have to be done to build up a body of research that will lend itself to a particular hypothesis. The problem is with voluntary studies is that usually only people will strong feelings will respond e.g. I really love/hate my CI and want to tell everyone about it. Those who are just chugging on and getting on with their lives don't really care.

For those interested I've quoted the section where they describe the way they conducted the survey:

I agree with u. Parents need to be careful and not assume just from one study that the results will be the same for their children.

 

[jillio]

it does not say it is a powerpoint presentation. it said it is a booklet on the research they had done.

See page 1, below the table of content, it mentioned the word "research" "The research in this booklet was..."

On page 3, it tells why they produced the booklet.

On page 17 in that booklet, it shows you the details of the study.

Yeah, but not enough details. Just becasue it mentions the eword research doesn't mean that this qualifies as research.

 

[jillio]

That's partly because the population (the total number of teenagers with CIs) is small as well. I notice in the methodology of the study description they said they selected a population (about 128) at random and then wrote to them all asking them to participate in the study. 33 responded. That response rate is pretty average/typical for surveys like this - most people simply aren't interested or bothered about participating in research.

More studies have to be done to build up a body of research that will lend itself to a particular hypothesis. The problem is with voluntary studies is that usually only people will strong feelings will respond e.g. I really love/hate my CI and want to tell everyone about it. Those who are just chugging on and getting on with their lives don't really care.

For those interested I've quoted the section where they describe the way they conducted the survey:

That's my point. The above information is incomplete for research methodology.

 

[R2D2]

That's my point. The above information is incomplete for research methodology.

Yes, I don't think that anyone here is saying "well, that proves it then. Let's move on." It's simply one of the first studies of hopefully many. I imagine that most other following studies will be similar in nature due to the relatively small population of implanted teenagers at the moment.

However, the findings were very interesting and of relevance to parents. For example the concern about technological dependence of many of the teenagers involved. It may encourage parents to think about how they can address and plan for that whether it's getting a spare processor, keeping copies of maps, learning sign and so on.

You also get a picture that having a CI does not preclude learning to sign and developing a deaf identity. Sometimes people present it as an "either/or" choice and I think it's helpful for parents to know that it's possible to have the best of both.

 

[jillio]

Yes, I don't think that anyone here is saying "well, that proves it then. Let's move on." It's simply one of the first studies of hopefully many. I imagine that most other following studies will be similar in nature due to the relatively small population of implanted teenagers at the moment.

However, the findings were very interesting and of relevance to parents. For example the concern about technological dependence of many of the teenagers involved. It may encourage parents to think about how they can address and plan for that whether it's getting a spare processor, keeping copies of maps, learning sign and so on.

You also get a picture that having a CI does not preclude learning to sign and developing a deaf identity. Sometimes people present it as an "either/or" choice and I think it's helpful for parents to know that it's possible to have the best of both.

I don't have a problem with that at all, as long as one understands that it is anecdotal evidence.

 

[rick48]

Yes, I don't think that anyone here is saying "well, that proves it then. Let's move on." It's simply one of the first studies of hopefully many. I imagine that most other following studies will be similar in nature due to the relatively small population of implanted teenagers at the moment.

However, the findings were very interesting and of relevance to parents. For example the concern about technological dependence of many of the teenagers involved. It may encourage parents to think about how they can address and plan for that whether it's getting a spare processor, keeping copies of maps, learning sign and so on.

You also get a picture that having a CI does not preclude learning to sign and developing a deaf identity. Sometimes people present it as an "either/or" choice and I think it's helpful for parents to know that it's possible to have the best of both.

Agreed, good points.

I am not going to engage in semantical discussions. It is a relevent piece of research and parents considering an implant for their children should read it and draw from it their own conclusions.
Rick

 

[jillio]

Agreed, good points.

I am not going to engage in semantical discussions. It is a relevent piece of research and parents considering an implant for their children should read it and draw from it their own conclusions.
Rick

I repeat, yep. As long as one understands that it is anecdotal evidence.

 

[Boult]

I repeat, yep. As long as one understands that it is anecdotal evidence.

That's your opinion. my opinion, it is a research. So let us all agree to disagree and leave at it.

 

[R2D2]

I don't have a problem with that at all, as long as one understands that it is anecdotal evidence.

Any piece of qualitative research that is trying to capture something subjective, like the opinions of teenagers, is going to have an anecdotal feel about it.

 

[flip]

I find it interesting that we are going quickly into a semantical dicussion when we dicuss wether this paper is relevant or not. This is a sign that this "research" is of little use. Research from universities are done to avoid this kind of dicussions, and "draw from it their own conclusions", like Rick states.

This paper is not going to be the first of many, sorry. It is far from the first time I have seen of this kind of brochure. It's not possible to collect them into sources for future research, due to their lack of validity. That's why is seems so new everytime this kind of advertisement shows up. If anyone want to make a bet with me if this paper is going to be included in any sources of research, or included in a university research journal, just tell me. High amounts only

 

[flip]

You also get a picture that having a CI does not preclude learning to sign and developing a deaf identity. Sometimes people present it as an "either/or" choice and I think it's helpful for parents to know that it's possible to have the best of both.

This brouchure states that most kids neither feel strong deaf nor strong hearing, and none of the kids gives any hint of knowing British Sign Language, while you get a picture of developing a deaf identity and learning to sign. This is semantics. This is also an example on how it is possible to draw very different conclusions from this brochure, based on the readers belifs.

 

[Drew's Dad]

It's a collection of quotes from teens with CI's.

Call it research if you like, call it a load of garbage, call it whatever you want. I don't care if these quotes were elicited by 25 of the top scientific research gurus in the world, or if these quotes were obtained by walking up to CI teens and asking thier opinion in return for a candy bar.

The fact is that I now know some opinions of teens with CI's where before I did not.

I have no idea why (other than wanting background info on these kids to gague why they might have their opinions) there is such debate over this paper and whether it is scientific research or not.

I don't need a scientific study to know that kids like XBox, and I don't need a scientific study to know that kids don't like classical music - I know this from non-scientific indications of that. Now, If I take these indications and conclude that kids always like Xbox, or always dislike classical music, then that's me being foolish. However, that does not mean that the information I've recieved is worthless.

I never even considered that this paper would be considered as some scientific piece of data that proved any sort of hypothesis. Maybe some would, I don't know. It looks quite clearly to me to be a collection of responses from kids to certain questions. I don't see any conclusion at the bottom that says "Parents, CI kids are happier than those without, so stop on by the ____ center to get your kids implanted today at the low low price of $60,000."

I agree that this is not scientific data that would be quoted in a medical publication that is drawing some conclusion on the matter. I disagree that it is not of value as most of us are always (at least in part) relying on the opinions of those they talk to, and that is never obtained in a scientific manner.

 

[jillio]

Any piece of qualitative research that is trying to capture something subjective, like the opinions of teenagers, is going to have an anecdotal feel about it.

Qualitative research is just as valid and reliable as quantitative research. Difference is in instruments and measurement. I read numerous qualitative studies, non of which have an anecdotal feel, because they have internal and external validity and have used reliable instruments and measurement. You can collect subjective data using objective means, and the same guidelines that apply to quanitiative research.

What makes this anecdotal is the extremely small sample size, no valid or reliable instrument, and no valid or reliable measures. Doesn't mean that the info provided is not true, but it cannot be genralized beyond the participants--the 29 people interviewed.

 

[jillio]

That's your opinion. my opinion, it is a research. So let us all agree to disagree and leave at it.

Sorry--not my opinion. Fact. This study does not qualify as research.

 

[jillio]

This brouchure states that most kids neither feel strong deaf nor strong hearing, and none of the kids gives any hint of knowing British Sign Language, while you get a picture of developing a deaf identity and learning to sign. This is semantics. This is also an example on how it is possible to draw very different conclusions from this brochure, based on the readers belifs.

Which means they have not completed the one of the developmental tasks of childhood--identity formation. Until they are able toa ccomplish that, they will remain fragmented as suffer difficulties as a result. You don't have to accept my word for it--just read a little Erik Erikson or talk to any clinical psychologist walking down the street.

 

[flip]

Which means they have not completed the one of the developmental tasks of childhood--identity formation. Until they are able toa ccomplish that, they will remain fragmented as suffer difficulties as a result. You don't have to accept my word for it--just read a little Erik Erikson or talk to any clinical psychologist walking down the street.

I accept your word for it, almost all deaf people that have lived for a while know about this problem. I also happen to have a book about clinical psychology for deaf counselors(Counselling: the Deaf Challenge, not from Gallaudet Press), where pretty big parts of the book covers this. But guess the topic you bring up here is too hard to grasp for some parents that find composure in information from specific organizations, like the one we are talking about here.

 

[rick48]

"I find it interesting that we are going quickly into a semantical dicussion when we dicuss wether this paper is relevant or not. This is a sign that this "research" is of little use. Research from universities are done to avoid this kind of dicussions, and "draw from it their own conclusions", like Rick states."

On the contrary, far from being of "little use", I find this research to be very useful and have said so. My reference to semantics is that I feel it is a red-herring and distracting us from talking about the findings of the research. The findings go beyond the typical discussion of "I know ci teens and they're doing great" versus "I know ci teens and they hate their cis" (and yes, I have been part of those discussions). It gives parents something they can evaluate and if so inclined, an organization to contact if they have further questions.