The effects of evaluation and multiple stimulation in the stimulus-response paradigm of articulation therapy were studied. Changes in the natural latency between stimulus and response were also observed. The results indicate that evaluation improved the effectiveness of the method, that multiple stimulation was more effective at the beginning of the learning task while single stimulation was more effective during the final modification stages of the learning task, and that latency tended to decrease as responses became more accurate.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BerryM. F., & EisensonJ.Speech disorders, principles and practices of therapy. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts Educational Div., 1956.
2.
CarrellJ. A.Disorders of articulation. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1968.
3.
FilleyF. S.Stimulability as a predictor of speech improvement for misarticulations by children receiving no therapy. Unpublished Master's thesis, Indiana Univer., 1957.
4.
FlennerC. F.A comparative study of children's immediate and latent imitations of Spanish phrases. Unpublished Master's thesis, Ohio State Univer., 1971.
5.
HulitL. M.Effects of varying latencies in the stimulus-response paradigm of speech therapy. Unpublished Master's thesis, Ohio State Univer., 1971.
6.
HulitL. M.Evaluation and multiple stimulation in the stimulus-response paradigm of articulation therapy. Unpublished Master's thesis, Ohio State Univer., 1972.
7.
HullM. E.Anticipatory speech responses in children with articulation defects. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 1948, 13, 268–272.
8.
HumphreyW. H., & MilisenR.A study of the ability to reproduce unfamiliar sounds which have been presented orally. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 1954, Monograph Supplement 4, 57–69.
9.
IrwinR. B.Speech and hearing therapy. Pittsburgh: Stanwix, 1969.
10.
MilisenR.A rationale for articulation disorders. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 1954, Monograph Supplement 4, 5–17.
11.
RiceD. B., & MilisenR.The influences of increased stimulation upon the production of unfamiliar sounds as a function of time. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 1954, Monograph Supplement 4, 79–86.
12.
RomansE. F., & MilisenR.Effect of latency between stimulation and response and response on reproduction of sounds. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 1954, Monograph Supplement 4, 71–78.
13.
TravisL. E.Speech pathology. New York: Appleton, 1931.
14.
Van RiperC.Speech correction, principles and methods. (4th ed.) Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1963.
15.
WebbC. E., & SiegenthalerB. M.Comparison of aural stimulation methods for teaching speech sounds. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 1957, 22, 264–270.
