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


     

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.45 844-857 October 2002. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2002/068)
© 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 Bosshardt, H.-G.
Right arrow Articles by Nil, L. F. d.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bosshardt, H.-G.
Right arrow Articles by Nil, L. F. d.

Effects of Category and Rhyme Decisions on Sentence Production

Hans-Georg Bosshardt 1
Waltraud Ballmer 1

Luc F. de Nil 2
1 Ruhr-Universität Bochum Bochum, Germany
2 University of Toronto and Toronto Western Research Institute Toronto, Canada

hgb{at}kli.psy.ruhr-uni-bochum.de

The aim of the present experiment was to investigate differences between persons who stutter and persons who do not stutter during the production of sentences in a single task versus two dual-task conditions. Participants were required to form a sentence containing 2 unrelated nouns. In dual-task conditions, rhyme and category decisions were used as secondary tasks. The results for 14 adults who stutter and 16 adults who do not stutter are reported. Dependent variables were the number of correct rhyme and category decisions, decision latencies, length, number of propositions, sentence latency, speech rate of sentences, disfluencies, and stuttering rates. The results indicated that both groups reduced the average number of correct rhyme and category decisions when this task was performed concurrently with sentence generation and production. Similarly, the 2 groups of participants did not differ with respect to the correctness and latency of their decisions. Under single-task conditions the sentences of both groups had a comparable number of propositions. But under dual- as compared with singletask conditions persons who stutter significantly reduced the number of propositions whereas persons who do not stutter did not show a significant dual- versus single-task contrast. Experimental conditions did not significantly influence stuttering rates. These results suggest that persons who stutter require more processing capacity for sentence generation and articulation than persons who do not stutter and that both groups keep stuttering rates at a constant level by adjusting the number of propositional units of their linguistic productions. The results support the view that the organization of the speech-production system of persons who stutter makes it more vulnerable to interference from concurrent attention-demanding semantic tasks.

KEY WORDS: sentence production, stuttering, adults, dual task

Submitted on October 2, 2001
Accepted on May 7, 2002




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JSLHRHome page
V. P. C. Lim, M. Lincoln, Y. H. Chan, and M. Onslow
Stuttering in English-Mandarin Bilingual Speakers: The Influence of Language Dominance on Stuttering Severity
J Speech Lang Hear Res, December 1, 2008; 51(6): 1522 - 1537.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JSLHRHome page
C. Weber-Fox and A. Hampton
Stuttering and Natural Speech Processing of Semantic and Syntactic Constraints on Verbs
J Speech Lang Hear Res, October 1, 2008; 51(5): 1058 - 1071.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

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 © 2002 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.