Charles M. Runyan

Unsophisticated judges' perceptual evaluations of the speech of “successfully treated” stutterers

Abstract The purpose of this investigation was to determine if the speech of “successfully therapeutized” stutterers and a group of partially treated stutterers was perceptually different from the speech of normal speakers when judged by unsophisticated listeners. Tape-recorded speech samples of treated stutterers were obtained from leading proponents of (1) Van Riperian, (2) metronome-conditioned speech retraining, (3) delayed auditory feedback, (4) operant conditioning, (5) precision fluency shaping, and (6) “holistic” therapy programs. Fluent speech samples from these groups of stutterers were paired with matched fluent samples of normal talkers and presented to a group of 20 unsophisticated judges. The judges were instructed to select from each paired speech sample presented to them the one produced by the stuttering subject. The results of the analyses showed that five of seven experimental groups were identified at levels significantly above chance. It can be concluded that the fluent speech of the partially and successfully treated stutterers was perceptibly different from the utterances of the normal speakers and that the perceptual disparity can be detected, even by unsophisticated listeners.

Perceptual study of the speech of “successfully therapeutized” stutterers

Abstract The purpose of this investigation was to determine if the fluent speech of “successfully therapeutized” stutterers and a group of partially treated stutterers was perceptually different from the fluent speech of normal speaking subjects. Tape recorded speech samples of treated stutterers were obtained from leading exponents of (1) Van Riperian, (2) metronome-conditioned speech retraining, (3) delayed auditory feedback, (4) operant conditioning, (5) precision fluency shaping, and (6) “holistic” therapy programs. All forms of disfluency were edited out of these tapes. The remaining samples were then paired with matched fluent samples of normal talkers and presented to a group of 20 sophisticated judges. The judges were instructed to select from each paired speech sample presented to them the one produced by the stuttering subject. The results of the analyses of variance for correct identification of the stutterers showed that the partially treated stutterers, as well as each group of therapeutized stutterers, were identified at levels significantly above chance. This meant that the fluent speech of the partially and successfully treated stutterers was perceptibly different from the utterances of the normal speakers sampled. In addition, the analyses of variance also revealed that all stuttering groups had a significant severity factor. This finding indicated there was a significant difference between the severity subgroup in all the samples investigated. These results were discussed in terms of their clinical implications.

Long-term effectiveness of the SpeechEasy fluency-enhancement device

UNLABELLED The SpeechEasy has been found to be an effective device for reduction of stuttering frequency for many people who stutter (PWS); published studies typically have compared stuttering reduction at initial fitting of the device to results achieved up to one year later. This study examines long-term effectiveness by examining whether effects of the SpeechEasy were maintained for longer periods, from 13 to 59 months. Results indicated no significant change for seven device users from post-fitting to the time of the study (t=-.074, p=.943); however, findings varied greatly on a case-by-case basis. Most notably, when stuttering frequency for eleven users and former users, prior to device fitting, was compared to current stuttering frequency while not wearing the device, the change over time was found to be statistically significant (t=2.851, p=.017), suggesting a carry-over effect of the device. There was no significant difference in stuttering frequency when users were wearing versus not wearing the device currently (t=1.949, p=0.92). Examinations of these results, as well as direction for future research, are described herein. EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES The reader will be able to: (a) identify and briefly describe two types of altered auditory feedback which the SpeechEasy incorporates in order to help reduce stuttering; (b) describe the carry-over effect found in this study, suggest effectiveness associated with the device over a longer period of time than previously reported, as well as its implications, and (c) list factors that might be assessed in future research involving this device in order to more narrowly determine which prospective users are most likely to benefit from employing the SpeechEasy.

A perceptual comparison between paired stimulus and single stimulus methods of presentation of the fluent utterances of stutterers

Abstract This investigation compared tape recordings containing the fluent utterances of treated stutterers with those of normal speakers as paired stimuli and single stimuli as presented to 20 sophisticated judges. Fluent utterances were obtained from stutterers successfully treated in one of the following programs: (1) Van Riperian, (2) metronome-conditioning speech retraining, (3) delayed auditory feedback, (4) operant conditioning, (5) precision fluency shaping program, and (6) holistic therapy. In addition, a group of partially treated stutterers were included. The original tape recordings containing matched samples of the fluent utterances of a stutterer and normal speaker were presented as paired stimuli. These paired samples were then separated, randomized, and assembled individually on another tape recording and presented as single stimuli to the same judges. The results of the statistical analysis indicated that the fluent utterances of treated stutterers was perceptibly different from the fluent utterances of nonstutterers, regardless of the method of stimulus presentation.

A perceptual comparison: Stuttering and nonstuttering children's nonstuttered speech

Abstract Recently, perceptual evaluation of the nonstuttered speech of stutterers has received renewed research interest. To summarize, the majority of research on this subject reported the nonstuttered speech of adult stutterers was perceptually identifiable from that produced by normal speaking individuals. A continuation of this line of research would be to determine if the nonstuttered speech of children would be equally recognizable. The results of this investigation would indicate this is not the case. The implications of the sophisticated judges inability to identify stuttering children based on nonstuttered speech are discussed.

A perceptual comparison: All-voiced versus typical reading passage read by children

Abstract The present investigation tested the modified vocalization hypothesis (Hutchinson and Brown, Journal of Fluency Disorders, 1978, 3, 149) in young stuttering subjects. In this study, stuttering children ages 7–13 yr were instructed to read two experimentally constructed passages. One passage contained both voiced and voiceless phonemes; the second passage was constructed using only voiced phonemes. Results indicated there was neither a quantitative nor a qualitative difference in the stuttering blocks during the reading of either experimental passage. These results would appear not to be supportive of the modified vocalization hypothesis in children; however, as has been indicative of similar studies, 8 of 22 subjects did demonstrate more dysfluencies during the reading of the passage that contained both voiced and voiceless phonemes.