The effects of temporal modification of second speech signals on stuttering inhibition at two speech rates in adults

The role of temporal speech cues in facilitating the fluency of adults who stutter

“…The fluency enhancing effect of choral speech observed in the present study replicates findings reported in previous research (e.g., Andrews et al, 1982;Guntupalli et al, 2005;Howell, & Powell, 1987;Ingham & Packman, 1979;Kiefte & Armson, 2008;Rami et al, 2005). In the present study, the fluency enhancing effect of choral speech also was observed when temporal information in the choral speech signal was altered substantially to create a mismatch with normal speech prosody (i.e., the TCS condition).…”

“…The Role of Temporal Cues 23 consistent with results from studies that have incorporated filtering or compression of choral signals (e.g., Guntupalli et al, 2005;Rami et al, 2005). It also is consistent with findings from Barber (1939), wherein fluency enhancement occurred when speakers who stuttered heard choral signals that were mismatched in content with the passage they read aloud.…”

“…In contrast to the study by Guntupalli et al (2005), where the timing structure of the choral signal was temporally compressed but still proportionately congruent with typical speech, the durational characteristics of words within some of the choral signals used in the present study were altered such that some words had a longer-than-normal duration relative to surrounding words and other words had a shorterthan-normal duration relative to surrounding words. Consequently, temporal information within the choral signal was, to some extent, dissociated from the signal's syntactic structure and, consequently, its expected prosodic structure.…”

“…It has been well demonstrated that speakers who stutter exhibit marked improvement in fluency when speaking chorally with others (Andrews, Howie, Dozsa, & Guitar, 1982;Barber, 1939;Bloodstein, 1950;Freeman & Armson, 1998; Guntupalli Kalinowski, Saltuklaroglu, & Nanjundeswaran, 2005;Howell, & Powell, 1987;Ingham, Bothe, Jang, Yates, Cotton, & Seybold , 2009;Ingham & Packman, 1979;Ingham, Warner, Byrd, & Cotton, 2006;Johnson & Rosen, 1937;Kiefte & Armson, 2008;Rami, Kalinowski, Rastatter, Holbert, & Allen, 2005). Early attempts at explaining the fluency enhancing effects associated with choral speech occurred within a psychological framework.…”

“…The effects of choral speech signal manipulation on fluency enhancement have been examined in a range of studies (e.g., Barber, 1939;Guntupalli et al, 2005;Guntupalli, Nanjundeswaran, Kalinowski, & Dayalu, 2011;Hudock, Dayalu, Saltuklaroglu, Stuart, Zhang, & Kalinowski, 2011;Kiefte & Armson, 2008;Rami et al, 2005). Research findings suggest that fluency facilitation occurs even when the choral speech signal is mismatched with what the speaker is saying (see Barber, 1939;Cherry & Sayers, 1956, for early A c c e p t e d M a n u s c r i p t…”