Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

An instrument called a Probe was devised to present five levels of demand. Probes were given to three groups, an experimental group of nine young stutterers ranging in age from four to seven years, a control group of speech and language defective but non-stuttering children, and a second group of speech defect-free children. The hypotheses of the study were that the effect of level demand on dysfluency (Probe Level) is independent of (a) order of presentation, (b) duration of the speaker's response; and (c) the linguistic complexity of the speaker's response; and that when dysfluency has occurred at a given level of demand, recovery of fluency tends to occur upon reducing the level of demand. The data obtained from the probes supported the hypotheses. Date revealed significant monotonic increases in dysfluency with increasing Probe levels in all groups. Analysis of individual stutterers clearly supported group results. The Probes arrayed the three groups on a quantitative continuum of dysfluency as hypothesized and revealed qualitative differences between stutterers and both control groups, suggesting that dysfluency is a different phenomenon in stutterers than in non-stutterers. Data further revealed that when communicative demand was reduced, stutterers' dysfluency dropped to the level of the non-stuttering controls.

Behavior on the Probes was significantly related to severity of stuttering, suggesting the usefulness of further development of this instrument for test purposes.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bloodstein, O. , A Handbook on Stuttering. Chicago: National Easter Seal Society for Crippled Children and Adults (1969).

Brutten, E.J. and Shoemaker, D.J. , The Modification of Stuttering. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice-Hall (1967).

Davis, D.M. , The relation of repetitions in the speech of young children to certain measures of language maturity and situational factors: Part I. J. Speech Dis., 4, 303-318 (1939).

Eisenson, J. and Wells, C. , A study of the influence of communicative responsibility in a choral speech situation for stutterers. J. Speech Dis., 7, 259-262 (1942).

Ferguson, G.A. , Statistical Analysis in Psychology and Education, second edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Company, ( 1966).

JOHNSON, W. , and Associates, The Onset of Stuttering. Minneapolis, Univ. Minn. Press, (1959).

Lanyon, R.I. , Speech: Relation of nonfluency to information value. Science , 164, No. 1378, 451-452 (1969).

Lewis, D. , and Sherman, D. , Measuring the severity of stuttering. J. Speech Hearing Dis. , 16, 320-326 (1951).

MacKay, D.M. Information, Mechanism and Meaning. Cambridge, Massachusetts, M.I.T. Press, (1969).

10.

Muma, J.R. , Syntax of preschool fluent and disfluent speech: A transformational analysis . J. Speech Hearing Res., 14, 428-441 (1971).

11.

Quarrington, B. , Stuttering as a function of the information value and sentence position of words. J. Abnorm. Psychol., 70, 221-224 (1965).

12.

Silverman, F.H. and Goodban, M.T. , The effect of auditory masking on the fluency of normal speakers. J. Speech Hearing Res., 15, 543-546 (1972).

13.

Soderberg, G.A. , Linguistic Factors in Stuttering. J. Speech Hearing Res., 10, 801-810 (1967).

14.

Stocker, B. , Study on young stutterers. Paper presented to the New York State Speech and Hearing Association (May 4, 1971).

15.

Taylor, I.K. , What words are stuttered? Psych. Bull., 65, 233-242 (1966).

16.

Van Riper, C. , Speech Correction: Principles and Methods, third edition, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall ( 1954).

17.

Van Riper, C. , The Nature of Stuttering. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice-Hal (1971).

18.

Wingate, M.E. , The fear of stuttering. ASHA, 12, 3-5, (1971).

Stuttering in Young Children and Level of Demand

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References