Language abnormality in deaf people with schizophrenia: a problem with classifiers

Figures & data

Figure 1. Example of use of classifiers in BSL in the sentence, “The pen is on the paper”.

Table 1. Basic characteristics and comparisons between patients and controls.

	patients (N = 14)	controls (N = 35)	Statistical test	p-value
	Mean (SD)	Mean (SD)
Age (years)	43.71 (10.15)	42.06 (10.82)	t = −0.51 (47)	0.62
Gender (m/f)	9/5	17/18	x^2= 0.99	0.32
BSL AoA	4.07 (2.5)	4.14 (3.6)	t = 0.08	0.94
BSL YoE	39.64 (11.45)	37.34 (12.61)	t = −0.62	0.54
Raven’s Matrices	8.21 (2.3)	8.43 (2.3)	t = 0.3	0.77

Note: BSL AoA – age of acquisition of BSL; BSL YoE – years of exposure to BSL.

Figure 2. Interaction plots for classifier vs comprehension in the Deaf patients and the Deaf controls.

Table 2. Handshape error rates and between groups comparisons in the Real Object—dynamic task.

Error type	Group	Median	IQR	Z	p
Total	Patients	12.5	10.25–19	−3.11	.002
	Controls	6	3–8
Handshape	Patients	8.5	7–13.5	−3.11	.002
	Controls	3	1–6
Orientation	Patients	1	1–2	−1.26	.21
	Controls	1	0–2
Movement	Patients	0	0–1	Fisher’s Exact Test	.47
	Controls	0	0–0
Location	Patients	1	0–1	Fisher’s Exact Test	.50
	Controls	0	0–1
Dominance	Patients	0	0–0
	Controls	0	0–0
Symmetry	Patients	0	0–0
	Controls	0	0–0

Note: IQR: Interquartile Range.