Dear Madam,

I am working on recognition and interpretation of sign language ( Sings used by deaf people). 

What kind of papers or data your looking for

hi professor:

PDF]Marital Quality in Deaf-Deaf and Deaf-Hearing Marriages

http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/2646/

http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/2646/

Dear Dr. Movallali,

Here are two nice papers about your question:

Am Ann Deaf. 2004-2005 Winter;149(5):415-20.

Marital status and birthrate of deaf people in two Swedish counties: the impact of social environment in terms ofdeaf community.

Carlsson PI1, Danermark B, Borg E.

Author information

Abstract

Deafness affects many social interactions. The impact of deafness depends on several factors, e.g., the type of social environment in terms of the particular Deaf community a person lives in. The authors recorded the birthrate and the proportions of married and divorced people among deafpeople in two Swedish counties: Narke, which had a strong Deaf community, and Varmland, whose Deaf community was weak. In both counties, the authors found that deafness was associated with low marriage rates and low birthrates. Further, in Narke, 99% of the people in the sample were married to another deaf person; only 10% were in Varmland. In Narke, the divorce rate among deaf people was about the same as that of the reference population (i.e., the county's marriage-age population). In Varmland, deaf people had a relatively low divorce rate. The findings are discussed from medical and social perspectives.

Disabil Health J. 2015 Oct;8(4):579-85. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2015.06.005. Epub 2015 Jun 30.

Sexual health behaviors of Deaf American Sign Language (ASL) users.

Heiman E1, Haynes S2, McKee M3.

Author information

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Little is known about the sexual health behaviors of Deaf American Sign Language (ASL) users.

OBJECTIVE:

We sought to characterize the self-reported sexual behaviors of Deaf individuals.

METHODS:

Responses from 282 Deaf participants aged 18-64 from the greater Rochester, NY area who participated in the 2008 Deaf Health were analyzed. These data were compared with weighted data from a general population comparison group (N = 1890). We looked at four sexual health-related outcomes: abstinence within the past year; number of sexual partners within the last year; condom use at last intercourse; and ever tested for HIV. We performed descriptive analyses, including stratification by gender, age, income, marital status, and educational level.

RESULTS:

Deaf respondents were more likely than the general population respondents to self-report two or more sexual partners in the past year (30.9% vs 10.1%) but self-reported higher condom use at last intercourse (28.0% vs 19.8%). HIV testing rates were similar between groups (47.5% vs 49.4%) but lower for certain Deaf groups: Deaf women (46.0% vs 58.1%), lower-income Deaf (44.4% vs 69.7%) and among less educated Deaf(31.3% vs 57.7%) than among respondents from corresponding general population groups.

CONCLUSION:

Deaf respondents self-reported higher numbers of sexual partners over the past year compared to the general population. Condom use was higher among Deaf participants. HIV was similar between groups, though HIV testing was significantly lower among lower income, less well-educated, and female Deaf respondents. Deaf individuals have a sexual health risk profile that is distinct from that of the general population.

Sincerely,

Zahra Jafari

Thanks a lot for your attention.

Best Wishes

Guita