Characteristics of Speech Disfluency and Stuttering Behaviors in 3- and 4-Year-Old Children

Pellowski, Mark W.; Conture, Edward G.

doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2002/002)

Cited by 80 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…TSO was significantly and positively correlated with chronological age (see Table 2), a finding similar to that reported by Pellowski and Conture (2002) and Yaruss, LaSalle, and Conture (1998). Despite this significant, positive correlation, substantial variance in TSO remained after controlling for chronological age (i.e., 60% of the variance remained).…”

Section: Within-group (Cws) Assessment Of the Relation Of Time Since supporting

confidence: 84%

Relation of emotional reactivity and regulation to childhood stuttering

Karrass¹,

Walden²,

Conture³

et al. 2006

Journal of Communication Disorders

Self Cite

175

193

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the present study was to examine relations between children's emotional reactivity, emotion regulation and stuttering. Participants were 65 preschool children who stutter (CWS) and 56 preschool children who do not stutter (CWNS). Parents completed the Behavior Style Questionnaire (BSQ) [McDevitt S. C., & Carey, W. B. (1978). A measure of temperament in 3-7 year old children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines,19,[245][246][247][248][249][250][251][252][253]. Three groups of BSQ items measuring emotional reactivity, emotion regulation, and attention regulation were identified by experts in children's emotions. Findings indicated that when compared to their normally fluent peers, CWS were significantly more reactive, significantly less able to regulate their emotions, and had significantly poorer attention regulation, even after controlling for gender, age, and language abilities. Findings suggest that the relatively greater emotional reactivity experienced by preschool children who stutter, together with their relative inability to flexibly control their attention and regulate the emotions they experience, may contribute to the difficulties these children have establishing reasonably fluent speech and language.Learning outcomes-The reader should be able to (1) define emotional reactivity and emotion regulation, (2) explain how emotional reactivity and emotion regulation relate to preschool stuttering, and (3) understand recent empirical evidence linking reactivity and regulation to preschool stuttering.Despite an extensive literature in psychology regarding emotional reactivity and regulation (see Eisenberg & Fabes, 1992, for a review) and an equally extensive literature in speechlanguage pathology regarding stuttering (e.g., Bloodstein, 1995; Conture, 2001; Guitar, 1998), in recent years there has been relatively little intersection between speech-language pathology approaches to stuttering and psychological approaches to emotion, stress and coping (for early, notable exceptions, see Fitzsimons, 1960, and Brutten & Shoemaker, 1967). This is unfortunate given that emotional reactivity and regulation have been shown to influence a wide range of developmentally important outcomes such as communication (Dixon & Shore, 1997;Dixon & Smith, 2000;Karrass & Braungart-Rieker, 2003;Paul & Kellogg, 1997), school performance (Ialongo, Edelsohn, & Kellam, 2001), and psychopathology (Eisenberg et al., 1993; Eisenberg, Fabes et al., 1997) in children who do not stutter.Given the relations among emotional reactivity and regulation and communicative development, there is reason to expect that reactivity and regulation may influence childhood stuttering, or at least possibly exacerbate or maintain the problem. This expectation is consistent with recent reviews and findings from empirical studies regarding the emotional development and behavior of children who stutter (e.g., Anderson, Pellowski, Conture & Kelly, 2003; Embrechts, Ebben, Franke & van de Poel, 1998; Wakaba, 19...

show abstract

Section: Within-group (Cws) Assessment Of the Relation Of Time Since supporting

confidence: 84%

Relation of emotional reactivity and regulation to childhood stuttering

Karrass¹,

Walden²,

Conture³

et al. 2006

Journal of Communication Disorders

Self Cite

175

193

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most importantly, and most obviously, not one of the categories carries the label ''stutter.'' 2 As will be seen, variations on Johnson's method, all without a ''stutter'' category, continue to be advocated as useful for differentiating between normally disfluent and stuttered speech Pellowski & Conture, 2002;Yaruss, 1997). …”

Section: Methods Of Measuring Stutteringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Have Disfluency-Type Measures Contributed to the Understanding and Treatment of Developmental Stuttering?

Einarsdóttir

Ingham

2005

Am J Speech Lang Pathol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This article critically reviews evidence to determine whether the use of disfluency typologies, such as syllable repetitions or prolongations , has assisted the understanding or treatment of developmental stuttering. Consideration is given to whether there is a need for a fundamental shift in the basis for constructing measures of stuttering behavior. Method: The history of using specific types of disfluencies to assess stuttering, including more recent developments such as counts of stuttering-like disfluencies, is reviewed. The focus is on studies that have investigated the validity and reliability of these perceptually based assessment methods. Conclusion: The evidence from use of disfluency-type measures shows that the behavioral difference between stuttering and normally fluent speakers is solely related to the amount of observable stuttering; the differences are only partially realized within disfluency-type measures. Indeed, because disfluency-type measures show poor reliability and conflate stuttered and nonstuttered speech, they have only limited heuristic value for research and provide no obvious benefits for clinicians. At best, they should be regarded as imprecise descriptors of observable stuttering and not a fundamental measure of stuttering. A recommended solution to the problematic history of verbal-based definitions of stuttering behavior is continued development and investigation of exemplar-based definition and measurement.

show abstract

“…All participants (a) scored at the 20th percentile or higher on three standardized speech-language tests (described below), (b) passed a hearing screening (see the Criteria for Group Classification section), (c) passed a general/oral motor functioning screening test (the Selected Neuromotor Task Battery [SNTB]; Wolk, 1990), and (d) had received no prior treatment for articulation, language, or stuttering concerns at the time of their participation in this study. All participants were paid volunteers in an ongoing series of studies concerning the relationship between stuttering and language/ phonology (e.g., Anderson & Conture, 2000;Melnick, Conture, & Ohde, in press;Pellowski & Conture, 2002). CWS were identified for participation in these studies by their parents, who had heard about them through (a) an advertisement in a free, widely read, monthly parentoriented magazine (Nashville Parent, estimated monthly readership of 230,000); (b) Middle Tennessee area speech-language pathologists, health care providers, daycare centers, and so on; or (c) referral to the Vanderbilt Bill Wilkerson Hearing and Speech Center for the initial assessment of childhood stuttering.…”

Section: Methods Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temperamental Characteristics of Young Children Who Stutter

Anderson

Pellowski

Conture

et al. 2003

J Speech Lang Hear Res

Self Cite

178

196

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this investigation was to assess the temperamental characteristics of children who do (CWS) and do not (CWNS) stutter using a norm-referenced parent-report questionnaire. Participants were 31 CWS and 31 CWNS between the ages of 3;0 (years;months) and 5;4 (CWS: mean age = 48.03 months; CWNS: mean age = 48.58 months). The CWS were matched by age (±4 months), gender, and race to the CWNS. All participants had speech, language, and hearing development within normal limits, with the obvious exception of stuttering for CWS. Children's temperamental characteristics were determined using the Behavioral Style Questionnaire (BSQ; S. C. McDevitt & W. B. Carey, 1978), which was completed by each child's parents. Results, based on parent responses to the BSQ, indicated that CWS are more apt, when compared to CWNS, to exhibit temperamental profiles consistent with hypervigilance (i.e., less distractibility), nonadaptability to change, and irregular biological functions. Findings suggest that some temperamental characteristics differentiate CWS from CWNS and could conceivably contribute to the exacerbation, as well as maintenance, of their stuttering.

show abstract

Characteristics of Speech Disfluency and Stuttering Behaviors in 3- and 4-Year-Old Children

Cited by 80 publications

References 30 publications

Relation of emotional reactivity and regulation to childhood stuttering

Relation of emotional reactivity and regulation to childhood stuttering

Have Disfluency-Type Measures Contributed to the Understanding and Treatment of Developmental Stuttering?

Temperamental Characteristics of Young Children Who Stutter

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About