口吃成人的语言相关焦虑

IF 0.9 4区 心理学 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES Journal of Psychophysiology Pub Date : 2022-07-21 DOI:10.1027/0269-8803/a000305
M. Bayat, R. Boostani, M. Sabeti, F. Yadegari, M. Taghavi, Mohammadreza Pirmoradi, P. Chakrabarti, M. Nami
{"title":"口吃成人的语言相关焦虑","authors":"M. Bayat, R. Boostani, M. Sabeti, F. Yadegari, M. Taghavi, Mohammadreza Pirmoradi, P. Chakrabarti, M. Nami","doi":"10.1027/0269-8803/a000305","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The relationship between anxiety and stuttering has always been a topic of debate with a great emphasis on research focused on examining whether speech-related anxiety can exacerbate stuttering. This investigation compares some speech-related anticipatory anxiety indices in fluent and dysfluent utterances in adults who stutter (AWS). We scored the level of cognitive speech-related anxiety (anticipatory anxiety) using a self-reporting method and also evaluated the autonomic aspects of anxiety (state anxiety) through recording changes in Galvanic Skin Response (GSR) signals. Explaining the link between stuttering and anxiety is expected to assist practitioners in stuttering assessment and subsequent treatment strategies. Phasic GSR values of six events related to answering the verbal stimuli through fluent and dysfluent responses were registered to measure sympathetic arousal as an index of state anxiety in 20 AWS ( Mage = 35 ± 4 years, range: 21–42). To quantitatively examine the cognitive aspects of speech-related anticipatory anxiety, two questionnaires were rated by participants addressing the stuttering anticipation and semantic difficulty of verbal stimuli. GSR measures of fluent events were significantly higher than dysfluent counterparts within time windows before and during answering aloud the verbal stimuli ( p < .001). Later in the experiment, GSR values of dysfluent events were found to be higher than their fluent counterparts ( p < .001). Stuttering anticipation yielded a weak negative meaningful correlation with the scores of fluency ( r = −0.283, p = .046) and a positive yet nonsignificant correlation with the stuttering scores. The semantic difficulty had a moderately significant correlation with stuttering anticipation ( r = 0.354, p = .012) but not a meaningful correlation with fluency state. Autonomic and cognitive indices of speech-related anticipatory anxiety are not robust predictors of fluency. Anxiety seems to be more of a consequence of stuttering than a cause.","PeriodicalId":50075,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychophysiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Speech Related Anxiety in Adults Who Stutter\",\"authors\":\"M. Bayat, R. Boostani, M. Sabeti, F. Yadegari, M. Taghavi, Mohammadreza Pirmoradi, P. Chakrabarti, M. Nami\",\"doi\":\"10.1027/0269-8803/a000305\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract. The relationship between anxiety and stuttering has always been a topic of debate with a great emphasis on research focused on examining whether speech-related anxiety can exacerbate stuttering. This investigation compares some speech-related anticipatory anxiety indices in fluent and dysfluent utterances in adults who stutter (AWS). We scored the level of cognitive speech-related anxiety (anticipatory anxiety) using a self-reporting method and also evaluated the autonomic aspects of anxiety (state anxiety) through recording changes in Galvanic Skin Response (GSR) signals. Explaining the link between stuttering and anxiety is expected to assist practitioners in stuttering assessment and subsequent treatment strategies. Phasic GSR values of six events related to answering the verbal stimuli through fluent and dysfluent responses were registered to measure sympathetic arousal as an index of state anxiety in 20 AWS ( Mage = 35 ± 4 years, range: 21–42). To quantitatively examine the cognitive aspects of speech-related anticipatory anxiety, two questionnaires were rated by participants addressing the stuttering anticipation and semantic difficulty of verbal stimuli. GSR measures of fluent events were significantly higher than dysfluent counterparts within time windows before and during answering aloud the verbal stimuli ( p < .001). Later in the experiment, GSR values of dysfluent events were found to be higher than their fluent counterparts ( p < .001). Stuttering anticipation yielded a weak negative meaningful correlation with the scores of fluency ( r = −0.283, p = .046) and a positive yet nonsignificant correlation with the stuttering scores. The semantic difficulty had a moderately significant correlation with stuttering anticipation ( r = 0.354, p = .012) but not a meaningful correlation with fluency state. Autonomic and cognitive indices of speech-related anticipatory anxiety are not robust predictors of fluency. Anxiety seems to be more of a consequence of stuttering than a cause.\",\"PeriodicalId\":50075,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Psychophysiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Psychophysiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1027/0269-8803/a000305\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/0269-8803/a000305","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要焦虑和口吃之间的关系一直是一个争论的话题,研究的重点是研究语言相关的焦虑是否会加剧口吃。本研究比较了成人口吃患者流利和不流利话语的预期焦虑指数。我们使用自我报告的方法对认知言语相关焦虑(预期焦虑)的水平进行评分,并通过记录皮肤电反应(GSR)信号的变化来评估焦虑的自主方面(状态焦虑)。解释口吃和焦虑之间的联系有望帮助从业者进行口吃评估和随后的治疗策略。通过流利和不流利反应回答言语刺激相关的六个事件的相相GSR值被记录下来,以测量交感神经兴奋作为20名AWS(年龄= 35±4岁,范围:21-42)的状态焦虑指数。为了定量研究言语相关预期焦虑的认知方面,参与者对言语刺激的口吃预期和语义困难进行了两份问卷评估。在大声回答言语刺激之前和期间,流利事件的GSR测量值显著高于不流利事件的对应时间窗(p < 0.001)。在实验后期,发现非流利事件的GSR值高于流利事件(p < 0.001)。结巴预期与流利性得分呈弱的负相关(r = - 0.283, p = 0.046),与结巴得分呈正相关但不显著。语义困难与结巴预期有中度显著相关(r = 0.354, p = 0.012),但与流利状态无显著相关。与言语相关的预期焦虑的自主和认知指数不是流利性的有力预测指标。焦虑似乎更多的是口吃的结果,而不是原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Speech Related Anxiety in Adults Who Stutter
Abstract. The relationship between anxiety and stuttering has always been a topic of debate with a great emphasis on research focused on examining whether speech-related anxiety can exacerbate stuttering. This investigation compares some speech-related anticipatory anxiety indices in fluent and dysfluent utterances in adults who stutter (AWS). We scored the level of cognitive speech-related anxiety (anticipatory anxiety) using a self-reporting method and also evaluated the autonomic aspects of anxiety (state anxiety) through recording changes in Galvanic Skin Response (GSR) signals. Explaining the link between stuttering and anxiety is expected to assist practitioners in stuttering assessment and subsequent treatment strategies. Phasic GSR values of six events related to answering the verbal stimuli through fluent and dysfluent responses were registered to measure sympathetic arousal as an index of state anxiety in 20 AWS ( Mage = 35 ± 4 years, range: 21–42). To quantitatively examine the cognitive aspects of speech-related anticipatory anxiety, two questionnaires were rated by participants addressing the stuttering anticipation and semantic difficulty of verbal stimuli. GSR measures of fluent events were significantly higher than dysfluent counterparts within time windows before and during answering aloud the verbal stimuli ( p < .001). Later in the experiment, GSR values of dysfluent events were found to be higher than their fluent counterparts ( p < .001). Stuttering anticipation yielded a weak negative meaningful correlation with the scores of fluency ( r = −0.283, p = .046) and a positive yet nonsignificant correlation with the stuttering scores. The semantic difficulty had a moderately significant correlation with stuttering anticipation ( r = 0.354, p = .012) but not a meaningful correlation with fluency state. Autonomic and cognitive indices of speech-related anticipatory anxiety are not robust predictors of fluency. Anxiety seems to be more of a consequence of stuttering than a cause.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Psychophysiology
Journal of Psychophysiology 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
25
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Psychophysiology is an international periodical that presents original research in all fields employing psychophysiological measures on human subjects. Contributions are published from psychology, physiology, clinical psychology, psychiatry, neurosciences, and pharmacology. Communications on new psychophysiological methods are presented as well. Space is also allocated for letters to the editor and book reviews. Occasional special issues are devoted to important current issues in psychophysiology.
期刊最新文献
Reviewers 2023 Neurocognitive Impairment in Non-Central Nervous System Cancer Survivors The Predictive Effects of Resting-State and Task-Related Prefrontal and Vagal Activity on Cognitive Performances Aggression Running Through Your Veins? The Relationship Between Heart Rate, Heart Rate Variability, and Aggression in Detained Juveniles Listen to Your Heart – Studying Heartbeat Detection and Emotional Intelligence
×
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