Tyler Foulger, Michael Jones, and Nathan Bench, BYU Computer Science
Introduction: The purpose of this MRI study was an attempt to discover and understand how communication is processed via the neural pathways of children ages 8-10. Analysis of the data we obtained would possibly help us in better adapting our head-mounted display (HMD) technology for deaf and hard-of-hearing children in educational settings where communication is common. Since HMDs utilize a sign language interpreter within a screen on the glasses, this technology would eliminate the need for deaf/hard-of-hearing users to constantly alternate their attention back and forth between a live interpreter in the room and the presentation by the teacher. Having this HMD interpreter within the same visual field as the presentation may seem beneficial as one can view the two simultaneously, but questions were raised on how this sort of communication would affect the user’s neural pathways—which questions became the basis for our MRI study.
Methodology: BYU’s new MRI machine in the McDonald building was used to conduct this experiment. The original plan was to recruit two groups, one with hearing subjects and one with deaf subjects, with five to eight children in each. However, unexpected complications arose, as we were unable to locate a single deaf child between the ages of 8-10 in most of northern Utah, without any internal metal devices—particularly Cochlear implants. Despite this setback, we continued the study with six hearing children. Two of them opted out from fear of the MRI machine, which was understandable for young children. Therefore, only four children were scanned. Each scanning consisted of three cycles, each with various sets of stimuli presented to the subject. Three different stimuli were used for the hearing subjects: written words, audible words, and pictures. Subjects were asked to think of a verb, or an action, to associate with each stimulus presented before them. Neural activity in response to this was monitored using fMRI (functional MRI), which tracks changes in blood flow. When neural activity of a certain region of the brain increases, blood flow to that region also increases. Structural MRI was also used to determine the brain’s structure. After three cycles were completed, each subject was discharged with a twenty-dollar gift card for participation in the study (even those that opted out still received one).
Results: At this moment, the fMRI scans from our study are on hold, and since the experiments were done just prior to Christmas break, analysis of these scans by trained professionals is unavailable. However, it is expected to begin as soon as the break is over.
Discussion: Analyzing the scans will tell us how each subject responded to the stimuli, and which neural pathways were used. With this analysis, we can then know how to better adapt our HMD technology for the benefit of deaf/heard-of-hearing students. But, without sufficient results present, not much can be discussed here until the scans are analyzed.
Conclusion: The goal of this MRI study was to provide neurological research to supplement HMD technology development, which will, in turn, benefit deaf and hard-of- hearing students in educational settings where linguistic access is not optimal. If the opportunity arose to conduct this experiment again, I would modify a few variables. I would vary the age groups. Instead of just one group of ages 8-10, I would recruit another group in the teenage range (14-16), and another in the 20s (20-22). This would allow us to determine how linguistic pathways in the brain are affected by physical and mental maturity. Also, I would relocate the experiment to a big city where the Deaf community is quite large and where there would be no problem with subject recruitment, such as Washington, DC, New York City, and Los Angeles.