ArticleCognitive processing2025
The impact of face masks on metacognition in sign language is mediated by proficiency.
Article in Cognitive processing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- On the Coexistence of Captions and Sign Language as Accessibility Solutions in Educational Settings.Audiology research · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Face masks can impact processing a narrative in sign language, affecting several metacognitive dimensions of understanding (i.e., perceived effort, confidence and feeling of understanding). However, to what extent this is modulated by sign language proficiency remains an open question. Thirty deaf adults were administered a narrative in Italian Sign Language (LIS), signed in three different visual conditions: no mask, transparent mask, opaque mask. In addition, they completed a Sentence Reproduction Task in LIS (LIS-SRT) to measure their sign language proficiency. Results showed that some of the error types in the LIS-SRT have significant correlations with performance in the comprehension task, revealing external validity for this sentence repetition test. Crucially, while sign language proficiency did not modulate the impact of face-masks on narrative comprehension, the metacognitive outcomes were clearly influenced by the interaction between LIS proficiency and visual conditions. Skilled signers experienced less effort and higher levels of confidence and feeling of understanding, whereas these subjective experiences were greatly impacted by visual conditions in less proficient signers. We discuss these findings in reference to cognitive load, thus also extending the construct of "listening effort" to sign languages. In addition, we relate differences in cognitive load in skilled vs. less proficient signers to the ability to extract and process at the same time multiple types of linguistic elements from the flow of signs (multilinear processing of sign language).
Indexed as
Identifiers
39870901What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.