Joy Armson

Effects of alterations in auditory feedback and speech rate on stuttering frequency.

This study investigated the effects of altered auditory feedback on stuttering frequency during speech production at two different speech rates. Nine stutterers, who exhibited at least 5% dysfluency during a reading task, served as subjects. They read eight different passages (each 300 syllables in length) while receiving four conditions of auditory feedback: nonaltered, masking, delayed, and frequency altered. For each auditory feedback condition, subjects read at both a normal and a fast rate. Results indicated that stuttering frequency was significantly decreased during conditions of delayed and frequency altered auditory feedback at both speech rates (p < 0.05). These findings refute the notion that a slowed speech rate is necessary for fluency enhancement under conditions of altered auditory feedback. Considering previous research and the results of this study, it is proposed that there may be two interdependent factors that are responsible for fluency enhancement: alteration of auditory feedback and modification of speech production.

Stuttering amelioration at various auditory feedback delays and speech rates

The primary purpose of this study was to determine if the finding of Kalinowski et al. (1993) of dramatic reductions in stuttering under delayed auditory feedback (DAF) at normal and fast speech rates could be replicated. The second purpose was to determine if stuttering frequency is differentially affected by various delays in an attempt to identify the optimal delay for fluency enhancement for both normal and fast speech rates. Fourteen adult stutterers read eight different passages at either a normal or fast speech rate under non-altered auditory feedback (NAF) and DAF with delays of 25, 50 and 75 ms. Results showed that significant fluency enhancement occurred under DAF at both normal and fast speech rates at all DAF settings (p < 0.05). This finding corroborates the notion that a slowed rate of speech is not a necessary antecedent for fluency improvement under conditions of altered auditory feedback. In addition, the results indicated that 50 ms appears to be the shortest delay producing the maximum reduction in stuttering frequency.

Stereotypes of stutterers and nonstutterers in three rural communities in Newfoundland

Abstract The existence of a negative stereotype of stutterers among residents of three small, rural communities in Newfoundland, Canada was investigated. Members of these communities (n = 106) completed a 25-item semantic differential scale developed by Woods and Williams (1976) which asked them to rate a hypothetical adult male stutterer and nonstutterer. Results indicated that community members perceived hypothetical stutterers in a negative manner in comparison to nonstutterers, despite the fact that 85% of the respondents reported knowing stutterers and 39% reported being related to stutterers. It is suggested the negative stuttering stereotype exists because nonstutterers generalize state to trait anxiety, and because of the nature of the stuttering moment itself. Since this study and previous studies appear to show that the stereotype is not modified by exposure to stutterers, familial relationships, and/or educational background, further research is needed to determine what, if any factor, can modify the pervasive negative stereotype.

Effect of single and combined altered auditory feedback on stuttering frequency at two speech rates

The purpose of this study was to determine if combining delayed auditory feedback (DAF) and frequency altered feedback (FAF) would enhance fluency more than either DAF or FAF alone. Ten stutterers read at normal and fast speech rates under nonaltered auditory feedback (NAF), DAF (i.e., a 50 ms delay), FAF (i.e., a one half octave downward shift), and a combination of DAF and FAF [(COMBO), i.e., a 50 ms delay plus a one half octave downward shift]. Results indicated that stuttering frequency was significantly reduced under all altered auditory conditions at high speech rates relative to the NAF condition. There were, however, no significant differences between the altered auditory feedback conditions (i.e., DAF, FAF, and COMBO). It is suggested that further studies be undertaken to explore the combination of altered auditory feedback conditions, as it may be the case that a floor effect was demonstrated with the singular presentations of DAF and FAF and further improvements in fluency enhancement could not be exhibited in the combined condition. Finally, these findings support the notion that a slowed rate of speech is not necessary for fluency enhancement under conditions of altered auditory feedback.

Effect of frequency altered feedback and audience size on stuttering

The effect of frequency altered feedback (FAF) and audience size on stuttering frequency was examined. Nine adults who stutter orally read to audiences of two, four and 15 people under conditions of FAF (one-half octave shift down) and non-altered auditory feedback (NAF). There was no statistically significant effect of audience size on stuttering frequency (p > 0.05). A statistically significant reduction in stuttering frequency was found under FAF relative to NAF (p < 0.5). Collapsed across audience conditions, stuttering frequency was reduced by 74%. These findings suggest that FAF may be useful as a treatment tool.

The effectiveness of SpeechEasy during situations of daily living

UNLABELLED A multiple single-subject design was used to examine the effects of SpeechEasy on stuttering frequency in the laboratory and in longitudinal samples of speech produced in situations of daily living (SDL). Seven adults who stutter participated, all of whom had exhibited at least 30% reduction in stuttering frequency while using SpeechEasy during previous laboratory assessments. For each participant, speech samples recorded in the laboratory and SDL during device use were compared to samples obtained in those settings without the device. In SDL, stuttering frequencies were recorded weekly for 9-16 weeks during face-to-face and phone conversations. Participants also provided data regarding device tolerance and perceived benefits. Laboratory assessments were conducted at the beginning and the end of the longitudinal data collection in SDL. All seven participants exhibited reduced stuttering in self-formulated speech in the Device compared to No-device condition during the first laboratory assessment. In the second laboratory assessment, four participants exhibited less stuttering and three exhibited more stuttering with the device than without. In SDL, five of seven participants exhibited some instances of reduced stuttering when wearing the device and three of these exhibited relatively stable amounts of stuttering reduction during long-term use. Five participants reported positive changes in speaking-related attitudes and perceptions of stuttering. Further investigation into the short- and long-term effectiveness of SpeechEasy in SDL is warranted. EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES The reader will be able to summarize: (1) issues pertinent to evaluating treatment benefits of wearable fluency aids and evaluate (2) the effect of SpeechEasy on stuttering frequency and the perceived benefits of device use in situations of daily living, as assessed weekly over the course of 9-16 weeks of wear, for seven adults who stutter.

Effect of Normal and Fast Articulatory Rates on Stuttering Frequency

The effect of speech rate on stuttering frequency was investigated with 20 stutterers. Subjects read two different 300-syllable passages at a normal and fast speech rate. Stuttering counts and articulatory rate were determined for each speech sample. Articulatory rates were derived from portions of the passages that were perceptually fluent. No statistically significant difference in stuttering frequency was found between the two speech rate conditions (p = 0.16) while a significant difference was observed for articulatory rate (p = 0.0007). These findings suggest that increased articulatory rate does not determine stuttering frequency with the same consistency as does decreased articulatory rate. It was concluded that a single explanation of the relationship between speech rate and stuttering frequency in terms of speech timing complexity is inadequate.

Pretreatment and Posttreatment Speech Naturalness Ratings of Adults With Mild and Severe Stuttering

Speech naturalness of adults who stutter was assessed before and after enrollment in the Precision Fluency Shaping Program. Sixty-four naive raters used a nine-point speech naturalness scale develo...

Perceptions of Stutterers and Nonstutterers During Speaking and Nonspeaking Situations

An examination of how the general public views a hypothetical adult male stutterer and a nonstutterer in speaking situations versus nonspeaking situations was undertaken. The desire was to determin...

Coordination of Laryngeal and Supralaryngeal Behavior in Stutterers

In 1971 Van Riper suggested that the temporal disruptions in speech which constitute stuttering result from the speaker possessing a deficient timing mechanism for speech. Recently Kent (1984) has reiterated this idea by postulating that the essence of stuttering is a reduced ability to generate temporal programs. A related explanation of stuttering is expressed in the discoordination hypothesis advanced by Perkins and colleagues (1976). According to the discoordination hypothesis, stuttering results from a speaker’s difficulty in coordinating phonation with articulation and respiration. This hypothesis expresses in weakened form, the view that the larynx has a central role in precipitating moments of stuttering, a notion which prompted much research in the 1970s. In general, these studies have left the question of laryngeal focus unresolved, although they have revealed evidence of a strong laryngeal component in stuttering (Conture, McCall & Brewer, 1977; Freeman & Ushijima, 1978). In order both to better understand the nature of speech timing in stutterers and to resolve the laryngeal focus question, it is appropriate to study how the three major speech systems interact or coordinate when stutterers are speaking.