Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.53 912-916 August 2010. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2010/10-0050)
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrowCustom Print
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pollard, R.
Right arrow Articles by Ramig, P. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Pollard, R.
Right arrow Articles by Ramig, P. R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Delicious   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Letter to the Editor

Response to Saltuklaroglu, Kalinowski, and Stuart (2010)

Ryan Pollard
University of Colorado at Boulder

Don Finan
University of Northern Colorado, Greeley

Peter R. Ramig
University of Colorado at Boulder

Contact author: Ryan Pollard, University of Colorado at Boulder, Speech, Language & Hearing Sciences, 409 UCB, Boulder, CO 80309. E-mail: ryan.pollard{at}colorado.edu.

Purpose: To reply to the criticisms of Saltuklaroglu, Kalinowski, and Stuart (2010) by addressing their concerns regarding our study's methodology, statistical analyses, and findings. Also, to challenge what we view as omissions, misinterpretations, and inaccuracies on their part.

Results: Our operational definition of stuttering was sound. Participant adherence to the treatment protocol was telling and appropriately enforced. The question-asking task was proper given participant characteristics. Statistical analyses of treatment effects were correctly interpreted. Our general conclusions regarding the clinical merit of the SpeechEasy were misinterpreted by Saltuklaroglu and colleagues; our findings were in fact far less nullifying and more balanced than what they claim.

Conclusions: While robust immediate effects of altered auditory feedback (AAF) in the laboratory are well documented, recent longitudinal experiments conducted in naturalistic settings have found less consistent and pronounced effects with the SpeechEasy. These reports also indicate that initial reductions in stuttering are often not maintained over time. Future efforts to determine why this is so would be worthwhile.

KEY WORDS: stuttering, treatment, altered auditory feedback, clinical trials, prosthetic devices


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Delicious Delicious   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?