The Effects of Different Sources and Modalities of Stuttering Disclosure on Listeners' Perceptions of a Child Who Stutters.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1159/000529499
Gregory Snyder, Peyton McKnight Sinak, Ashlee Manahan, Myriam Kornisch, Paul Blanchet
{"title":"The Effects of Different Sources and Modalities of Stuttering Disclosure on Listeners' Perceptions of a Child Who Stutters.","authors":"Gregory Snyder,&nbsp;Peyton McKnight Sinak,&nbsp;Ashlee Manahan,&nbsp;Myriam Kornisch,&nbsp;Paul Blanchet","doi":"10.1159/000529499","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Research reveals the clinical efficacy of both verbal and written stuttering disclosure statements provided by a child who stutters (CWS) and his advocates (i.e., mother or teacher) [Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2020 Jul;51(3):745-60 and Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2021 Aug;52(4):1031-1048]. Although existing data reveal that both the source (i.e., self- vs. advocate disclosure) and modality (i.e., verbal or written) of stuttering disclosure yields significant improvements in the perceptions of speech skills and personality characteristics of CWS, there is a paucity of research directly comparing the modality (verbal vs. written) and source (self, mother, teacher) of disclosure statements. Accordingly, this study analyzes listeners' perceptions of a 12-year-old male CWS' speech skills and personal characteristics, as a function of both the source and modality of factual stuttering disclosure statements [Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2020 Jul;51(3):745-60 and Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2021 Aug;52(4):1031-1048].</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 641 college-aged adults participated in this analysis; study participants reported their perceptions of speech skills and personality characteristics of a 12-year-old CWS as a function of stuttering disclosure. Participants were randomly assigned to view one video containing one of two disclosure modalities (verbal or written), one of three stuttering disclosure source conditions (self-disclosure, mother disclosure, and teacher disclosure), or a no-disclosure control condition. Participants in the control group viewed a brief video of a 12-year-old CWS reciting a short reading passage; participants in the experimental groups viewed their assigned disclosure statement followed by the same video used in the control condition. Immediately following the video, all participants completed a survey quantifying their perceptions of the CWSs relative to his speech skills and personal characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results reveal optimal results via verbal self-disclosure and verbal teacher disclosure. A limited number of nominally positive perceptual differences were noted within the written mother disclosure group, while written CWS self-disclosure yielded significantly negative perceptions of the CWS. Overall, verbal disclosures yield far more significant and desirable perceptions of CWS' speech skills and personal characteristics when compared to written stuttering disclosure.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Results of this analysis reveal that verbal stuttering disclosure is significantly more effective in improving listeners' perceptions of a CWS, when compared to written stuttering disclosures. Despite the widespread adoption of written communication over digital media (e.g., email and text messages), these data support the notion that face-to-face or video verbal stuttering disclosure provides the most desirable perceptual benefits for CWS. Within verbal stuttering disclosure, verbal self-disclosure appears to be the single best overall disclosure methodology relative to clinical application.</p>","PeriodicalId":12114,"journal":{"name":"Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica","volume":"75 4","pages":"253-264"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000529499","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Research reveals the clinical efficacy of both verbal and written stuttering disclosure statements provided by a child who stutters (CWS) and his advocates (i.e., mother or teacher) [Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2020 Jul;51(3):745-60 and Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2021 Aug;52(4):1031-1048]. Although existing data reveal that both the source (i.e., self- vs. advocate disclosure) and modality (i.e., verbal or written) of stuttering disclosure yields significant improvements in the perceptions of speech skills and personality characteristics of CWS, there is a paucity of research directly comparing the modality (verbal vs. written) and source (self, mother, teacher) of disclosure statements. Accordingly, this study analyzes listeners' perceptions of a 12-year-old male CWS' speech skills and personal characteristics, as a function of both the source and modality of factual stuttering disclosure statements [Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2020 Jul;51(3):745-60 and Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2021 Aug;52(4):1031-1048].

Methods: A total of 641 college-aged adults participated in this analysis; study participants reported their perceptions of speech skills and personality characteristics of a 12-year-old CWS as a function of stuttering disclosure. Participants were randomly assigned to view one video containing one of two disclosure modalities (verbal or written), one of three stuttering disclosure source conditions (self-disclosure, mother disclosure, and teacher disclosure), or a no-disclosure control condition. Participants in the control group viewed a brief video of a 12-year-old CWS reciting a short reading passage; participants in the experimental groups viewed their assigned disclosure statement followed by the same video used in the control condition. Immediately following the video, all participants completed a survey quantifying their perceptions of the CWSs relative to his speech skills and personal characteristics.

Results: Results reveal optimal results via verbal self-disclosure and verbal teacher disclosure. A limited number of nominally positive perceptual differences were noted within the written mother disclosure group, while written CWS self-disclosure yielded significantly negative perceptions of the CWS. Overall, verbal disclosures yield far more significant and desirable perceptions of CWS' speech skills and personal characteristics when compared to written stuttering disclosure.

Discussion: Results of this analysis reveal that verbal stuttering disclosure is significantly more effective in improving listeners' perceptions of a CWS, when compared to written stuttering disclosures. Despite the widespread adoption of written communication over digital media (e.g., email and text messages), these data support the notion that face-to-face or video verbal stuttering disclosure provides the most desirable perceptual benefits for CWS. Within verbal stuttering disclosure, verbal self-disclosure appears to be the single best overall disclosure methodology relative to clinical application.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同来源和方式的口吃披露对听者对口吃儿童认知的影响。
研究揭示了由口吃儿童及其倡导者(即母亲或老师)提供的言语和书面口吃披露声明的临床疗效[Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2020 Jul;51(3):745-60和Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2021 Aug;52(4):1031-1048]。虽然现有数据显示,口吃的披露来源(即自我披露与他人披露)和方式(即口头或书面披露)都能显著改善口吃儿童对言语技能和人格特征的认知,但直接比较披露陈述的方式(口头披露与书面披露)和来源(自我、母亲、老师)的研究却很少。因此,本研究分析了听者对一名12岁男口吃者的言语技能和个人特征的感知,以及事实性口吃披露陈述的来源和方式[Lang speech Hear Serv Sch. 2020 Jul;51(3):745-60和Lang speech Hear Serv Sch. 2021 Aug;52(4):1031-1048]。方法:共有641名大学年龄的成年人参与了这项分析;研究参与者报告了他们对一个12岁口吃儿童的言语技能和人格特征的感知,作为口吃披露的功能。参与者被随机分配观看一段视频,其中包含两种披露方式(口头或书面)中的一种,三种口吃披露来源条件中的一种(自我披露、母亲披露和老师披露),或者不披露控制条件。对照组的参与者观看了一个12岁的CWS背诵短文的简短视频;实验组的参与者观看了他们指定的披露声明,随后观看了与对照组相同的视频。在观看完视频后,所有参与者都完成了一份调查问卷,以量化他们对css的演讲技巧和个人特征的看法。结果:言语自我表露和教师言语表露效果最佳。在书面母亲披露组中发现了有限数量的名义上的积极知觉差异,而书面母亲自我披露产生了显著的消极知觉。总的来说,与书面披露相比,口头披露对口吃儿童的言语技能和个人特征产生了更重要和更可取的看法。讨论:本分析的结果表明,与书面口吃披露相比,言语口吃披露在提高听者对CWS的感知方面显着更有效。尽管通过数字媒体(如电子邮件和短信)广泛采用书面交流,但这些数据支持这样一种观点,即面对面或视频的言语口吃披露为CWS提供了最理想的感知益处。在言语口吃披露中,相对于临床应用,言语自我披露似乎是唯一最好的整体披露方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica
Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
10.00%
发文量
28
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Published since 1947, ''Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica'' provides a forum for international research on the anatomy, physiology, and pathology of structures of the speech, language, and hearing mechanisms. Original papers published in this journal report new findings on basic function, assessment, management, and test development in communication sciences and disorders, as well as experiments designed to test specific theories of speech, language, and hearing function. Review papers of high quality are also welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Effects of Puree Type and Color on Ratings of Pharyngeal Residue, Penetration, and Aspiration during FEES: A Prospective Study of 37 Dysphagic Outpatient Adults. Within- and cross-language generalization in narrative production of bilingual persons with aphasia following Semantic Feature Analysis therapy. Preliminary Investigation of Context-Aware AAC with Automated Just-in-Time Cloze Phrase Response Options for Social Participation from Children on the Autism Spectrum. The Relationship between Traditional Acoustic Measures and Cepstral Analysis of Voice. Cross-Linguistic Nasalance Comparisons: A Review of Speech Sample Sets and Preliminary Consideration of Effect of Lexical Tone.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1