{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020771513353115726, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005934718100890208, 'mean_word_length': 5.818181818181818, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Was cultural deprivation in fact sensory deprivation? Deprivation, retardation and intervention in the USA

In the 1950s, the term ‘deprivation’ entered American psychiatric discourse. This article examines how the concept of deprivation permeated the field of mental retardation, and became an accepted theory of etiology. It focuses on sensory deprivation and cultural deprivation, and analyzes the interventions developed, based on these theories. It argues that the controversial theory of cultural deprivation derived its scientific legitimization from the theory of sensory deprivation, and was a highly politicized concept that took part in the nature—nurture debate.