JSLHR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.40 373-384 April 1997.
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Prins, D.
Right arrow Articles by Wampler, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Prins, D.
Right arrow Articles by Wampler, S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Lexicalization in Adults Who Stutter

David Prins 1
Victoria Main 2

Susan Wampler 3
1 University of Washington Seattle
2 Educational Assessment Systems Albuquerque, NM
3 Lake Washington School District Seattle, WA

Three recent theories have implicated lexical processing failures as a possible source of fluency disruption in persons who stutter. Two experiments that bear upon these theories are reported. Both evaluate the effects on speech response latency of picture naming tasks designed to place selective demands on lexicalization: Experiment I, effects of one-word versus two-word responses; Experiment II, effects of a word's frequency of occurrence versus its number of syllables. Twelve adults who stutter and 12 with normally fluent speech participated in each experiment. In Experiment I, increases in naming latency for two-word (noun + verb) versus one-word (noun or verb) responses showed that demands for parallel processing did not differentiate the experimental groups. However, the between-group difference, showing longer latencies among those who stutter, was six times greater for the verb, than for the noun, task. Moreover, the group difference for verbs fully accounted for the size of the difference in the two-word task. Experiment II showed that the relative increase in naming latency associated with the word frequency effect versus the syllable latency effect was significantly greater in the stuttering than the nonstuttering group. Outcomes of the two experiments suggest that during lexicalization, as early as the L1 stage and first phase of L2, slow processing could serve to disrupt fluency in some persons who stutter. Under certain conditions, as specified in the three theories cited, such disruptions could set the occasion for stutter events.

KEY WORDS: stuttering, lexicalization, naming latency, grammatical encoding, phonological encoding

Submitted on July 8, 1996
Accepted on November 1, 1996


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JSLHRHome page
R. S. Newman and N. Bernstein Ratner
The Role of Selected Lexical Factors on Confrontation Naming Accuracy, Speed, and Fluency in Adults Who Do and Do Not Stutter
J Speech Lang Hear Res, February 1, 2007; 50(1): 196 - 213.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
All ASHA Journals AJA AJSLP JSLHR LSHSS
Copyright © 1997 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.