Selective Mutism The implications of current research for the practice of educational psychologists

Imich, André

doi:10.1080/0266736980140110

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Systematic observations of the child's reactions in various situations are seen as crucial in identifying what provokes the child's fears. A step‐by‐step treatment plan in the natural environment of kindergarten/school (acknowledged also by Cline & Baldwin, 2004; Imich, 1998; Johnson & Wintgens, 2001; Sage & Sluckin, 2004), working towards small goals made in agreement with the child, is reported as the preferred strategy in helping children overcoming phobias. Two children who experienced this in the study recovered.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Notable exceptions are Cline and Baldwin (2004) who advised a careful analysis of settings in which the child does and does not speak. Like Imich (1998) they recommended a broadly based behavioural approach, and aimed to include the teacher in the group of people with whom the child speaks. Johnson and Wintgens (2001) used a step‐by‐step approach to reducing anxiety in specific situations, and Sage and Sluckin (2004) emphasised teamwork between home, school and specialist services.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Could Selective Mutism be Re‐conceptualised as a Specific Phobia of Expressive Speech? An Exploratory Post‐hoc Study

Omdal¹,

Galloway

2007

Child Adoles Ment Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Selective mutism (SM) is now widely seen as a symptom of social anxiety. However, observations of children's interactions in the natural contexts of home and school/kindergarten suggest that this may be in need of review. Method: Data were available from two sources: first, interviews with six adults who had recovered from SM in childhood and adolescence; second, informal observations of five SM children in home and school/kindergarten, and semi-structured interviews with their parents and teachers. The research had three stages: (i) Data were examined for the presence of social anxiety and/or determined or stubborn behaviour, but neither provided a satisfactory explanation for the SM. (ii) The data suggested that SM could be reconceptualised as a specific phobia of their own speech. It is argued that if this is the case, SM should respond to intervention at school based broadly on a cognitive behaviour therapy methodology. (iii) A post hoc examination of observation and interview transcripts was used to test this hypothesis. Results: (i) Apart from two adults, no evidence was found of social anxiety. Determined and stubborn behaviour was observed but was inadequate as an explanation of SM. (ii) Two children recovered when exposed to classroom interactions that could be seen as consistent with the principles of graded in vivo flooding. Three children who were not exposed to similar interactions did not improve. Conclusions: SM may be understood and treated successfully at school/kindergarten as a specific phobia of expressive speech. Key Practitioner Message:• Children with SM should be observed at home and in the classroom; such observations may suggest that both social anxiety and determined/stubborn behaviour may be relatively unimportant in understanding SM • SM is better understood as a specific phobia of expressive speech • Teachers in mainstream schools can use teaching approaches that are consistent with the principles of graded in vivo flooding in the successful treatment of SM

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%