|
|
||||||||
Article |
University of California, Santa Barbara
Corresponding Author: Roger J. Ingham Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences University of California, Santa Barbara Santa Barbara, CA 93106 email: rjingham{at}speech.ucsb.edu
Purpose: To illustrate the way in which both Fluency Shaping (FS) and Stuttering Management (SM) treatments for developmental stuttering in adults are evidenced-based.
Method: A brief review of the history and development of FS and SM is provided. It illustrates that both can be justified as evidence-based treatments, each having sought evidence of a different kind – FS, evidence concerning treatment outcome; SM, evidence concerning the nature of the stutter event.
Conclusion: While outcome evidence provides the principal support for FS, support for SM comes principally from a cognitive learning model of defensive behavior as applied to the nature of the stutter event. Neither approach can claim anything like uniform success with adults who stutter. However, self-management and modeling are strategies common to both approaches, and have shown consistently positive effects on outcome. It is argued that both strategies merit additional treatment efficacy study. Cognitive behavior theory may provide a useful framework for this research.
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter What's this?
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH |
| All ASHA Journals | AJA | AJSLP | JSLHR | LSHSS |