Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education Impact Factor & Information

Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)

Journal description

The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education is a scholarly journal integrating and coordinating basic and applied research relating to individuals who are deaf including cultural developmental linguistic and educational topics. The Journals of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education addresses issues of current and future concern to allied fields encouraging interdisciplinary discussion. The journal promises a forum that is timely of high quality and accessible to researchers and educators as well as lay audiences. The journal consists of four issues per year including occasional Special Issues. Visit the website of the 19th International Congress on Education of the Deaf and 7th Asia-Pacific Congress on Deafness (ICED 2000). Sydney 9-13 July 2000.

Current impact factor: 1.02

Impact Factor Rankings

2015 Impact Factor Available summer 2016
2009 Impact Factor 1.375

Additional details

5-year impact 1.51
Cited half-life 7.50
Immediacy index 0.32
Eigenfactor 0.00
Article influence 0.38
Website Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education website
Other titles Journal of deaf studies and deaf education (Online), JDSDE
ISSN 1081-4159
OCLC 51288813
Material type Document, Periodical, Internet resource
Document type Internet Resource, Computer File, Journal / Magazine / Newspaper

Publisher details

Oxford University Press (OUP)

  • Pre-print
    • Author can archive a pre-print version
  • Post-print
    • Author cannot archive a post-print version
  • Restrictions
    • 12 months embargo
  • Conditions
    • Pre-print can only be posted prior to acceptance
    • Pre-print must be accompanied by set statement (see link)
    • Pre-print must not be replaced with post-print, instead a link to published version with amended set statement should be made
    • Pre-print on author's personal website, employer website, free public server or pre-prints in subject area
    • Post-print in Institutional repositories or Central repositories
    • Publisher's version/PDF cannot be used
    • Published source must be acknowledged
    • Must link to publisher version
    • Set phrase to accompany archived copy (see policy)
    • Eligible authors may deposit in OpenDepot
    • The publisher will deposit in PubMed Central on behalf of NIH authors
    • Publisher last contacted on 19/02/2015
    • This policy is an exception to the default policies of 'Oxford University Press (OUP)'
  • Classification
    ​ yellow

Publications in this journal

  • Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 09/2015; DOI:10.1093/deafed/env035
  • Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 09/2015; DOI:10.1093/deafed/env041
  • Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 08/2015; DOI:10.1093/deafed/env037
  • Source
    Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 06/2015; DOI:10.1093/deafed/env020
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to explore the relative contributions of phonological, semantic radical, and morphological awareness to Chinese word recognition in deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children. Measures of word recognition, general intelligence, phonological, semantic radical, and morphological awareness were administered to 32 DHH and 35 hearing children in Hong Kong. Hierarchical regression analyses showed that tone, semantic radical, and morphological awareness made independent contributions to word recognition in DHH children after the effects of age and intelligence were statistically controlled for. Semantic radical and morphological awareness was found to explain significantly more variance than tone awareness in predicting word recognition in DHH children. This study has replicated previous evidence regarding the importance of semantic radical and morphological awareness in Chinese word recognition in hearing children and extended its significance to DHH children. © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email:
    Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 03/2015; 20(2). DOI:10.1093/deafed/env003
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study explores how university students' thinking styles changed over a single academic year by twice administering the Thinking Styles Inventory-Revised II to 256 deaf or hard-of-hearing (DHH) students and 286 hearing students from art and design academic disciplines in China. Results showed that after having studied at the university for one academic year, hearing students showed increased use of Type I thinking styles (more creativity generated, less structured, and more complex) and less use of Type II thinking styles (more norm favoring, more structured, and more simplistic), whereas DHH students demonstrated increased use of both Type I and Type II thinking styles. Moreover, students' changes in thinking styles differed across university class levels. The contributions, limitations, and implications of the present research are discussed. © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail:
    Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 01/2015; 20(1):16-26. DOI:10.1093/deafed/enu038
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We compared alcohol use among adolescents with and without hearing loss. Adolescents with hearing loss reported consuming less alcohol, less binge drinking, fewer episodes of drunkenness, and a higher age at first drunkenness than their hearing peers. Alcohol use did not vary between students who were deaf or hard of hearing or between students with congenital versus acquired hearing loss. Although higher age, male gender, and larger friend networks predicted higher alcohol consumption among adolescents with and without hearing loss, worse grades at school were associated only with alcohol use among hearing students. Lower alcohol use among students with hearing loss when compared with hearing peers was, in part, explained by their lower level of peer-group integration. Although alcohol use is a less serious problem among students with hearing loss, a minority with risky consumption would benefit from interventions aimed at reducing alcohol use.
    Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 10/2014; 20(1). DOI:10.1093/deafed/enu034
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Students who have a hearing loss and a comorbid diagnosis of an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have multiple obstacles to overcome. Using Gallaudet Research Institute data, Szymanski, Brice, Lam, and Hotto calculated 1 deaf student in 59 received services for both a hearing loss and an ASD (Szymanski, Brice, Lam, & Hotto, 2012). Teachers of the deaf (TOD) in a Midwestern state completed a survey (N = 68) to indicate familiarity with evidence-based practices (EBP) from the field of ASD in order to confirm or reject the hypothesis that they would not report familiarity with these practices. Further analyses explored use and perceived effectiveness of EBP for those TOD who had familiarity with the instructional practices. Results of the study indicated that there was wide variance in TOD familiarity, use, and perceived effectiveness of the EBP.
    Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 10/2014; 20(1). DOI:10.1093/deafed/enu033
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study used a qualitative design to explore parent mentors’ summaries of conversations with more than 1,000 individual families of deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children receiving parent-to-parent support as part of an existing family support project. Approximately 35% of the families were Spanish speaking. Five parent mentors who have DHH children provided varied support primarily via the telephone to families with DHH children, frequently birth to age 3. The nature and types of support provided were examined and resulted in an in-depth analysis of the summary notes prepared by the parent mentors. The notes were coded using a mixed-methods software application. Three topics were the most prevalent within the conversations between parent mentors and family members: hearing-related topics, early intervention, and multiple disabilities. Several differences emerged between English-speaking and Spanish-speaking families receiving support. Implications and the significance of this study are discussed.
    Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 09/2014; 20(1). DOI:10.1093/deafed/enu029