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


     

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.42 1347-1354 December 1999.
© 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 Kalinowski, J.
Right arrow Articles by Rastatter, M. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kalinowski, J.
Right arrow Articles by Rastatter, M. P.

Effects of Monitoring Condition and Frequency-Altered Feedback on Stuttering Frequency

Joseph Kalinowski 1
Andrew Stuart 1
Loma Wamsley 1

Michael P. Rastatter 1
1 East Carolina University Greenville, NC

kalinowskij{at}mail.ecu.edu

The purpose of the study was to examine stuttering frequency during speaking conditions that are believed to mitigate stuttering frequency both with normal nonaltered auditory feedback (NAF) and a known fluency-enhancing feedback. Specifically, stuttering frequency was examined as a function of three monitoring conditions under NAF and frequency-altered feedback (FAF): no monitoring (i.e., speaking alone, in the absence of audio and visual recording), audiovisual monitoring (i.e., speaking alone with audiovisual recording), and audiovisual monitoring with observers (i.e., speaking with audiovisual recording in the presence of two observers). Seven adults and one adolescent who stutter servedas participants. Stuttering frequency was differentially affected across monitoring conditions under each auditory feedback condition (p= .027). Post hoc analyses revealed no significant difference in stuttering frequency between the two conditions in the absence of the observers (i.e., no monitoring vs. audiovisual monitoring) under NAF (p= .45). There was, however, a significant difference in stuttering frequency for the no-monitoring and audiovisual-monitoring conditions relative to the audiovisual-monitoring-with-observers condition (p= .0002). There was no statistically significant difference in stuttering frequency across monitoring conditions under FAF (p> .05). The findings are consistent with the notion that during NAF stuttering frequency varies as a function of hierarchical socioenvironmental conditions in which inanimate monitoring conditions constitute one entity. Such a relationship does not exist during FAF.

KEY WORDS: stuttering, cognitive input, environmental stress, stuttering treatment

Submitted on November 9, 1998
Accepted on April 14, 1999




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JSLHRHome page
A. Stuart, C. L. Frazier, J. Kalinowski, and P. W. Vos
The Effect of Frequency Altered Feedback on Stuttering Duration and Type
J Speech Lang Hear Res, August 1, 2008; 51(4): 889 - 897.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 AJSLPHome page
J. Kalinowski, T. Saltuklaroglu, A. Stuart, and V. K. Guntupalli
On the Importance of Scientific Rhetoric in Stuttering: A Reply to Finn, Bothe, and Bramlett (2005)
Am J Speech Lang Pathol, February 1, 2007; 16(1): 69 - 76.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NeurologyHome page
A. L. Foundas, A. M. Bollich, J. Feldman, D. M. Corey, M. Hurley, L. C. Lemen, and K. M. Heilman
Aberrant auditory processing and atypical planum temporale in developmental stuttering
Neurology, November 9, 2004; 63(9): 1640 - 1646.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
All ASHA Journals AJA AJSLP JSLHR LSHSS
Copyright © 1999 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.