No abstract

Purpose Adults who stutter (AWS) often attempt, with varying degrees of success, to suppress their stuttered speech. The ability to effectively suppress motoric behavior after initiation relies on executive functions such as nonselective inhibition. Although previous studies found that AWS were slower to inhibit manual, button-press response than adults who do not stutter (AWNS), research has yet to confirm a consistent relationship between manual and verbal inhibition. No study has examined verbal inhibition ability in AWS. The purpose of this study, therefore, is to compare verbal response inhibition between AWS and AWNS, and compare verbal response inhibition to both the overt stuttering and the lived experience of stuttering. Method Thirty-four adults (17 AWNS, 17 AWS) completed one manual and three verbal stop-signal tasks. AWS were assessed for stuttering severity (Stuttering Severity Instrument–Fourth Edition: SSI-4) and experience with stuttering (Overall Assessment of the Speaker's Experience With Stuttering [OASES]). Results Results indicate no correlation between manual and verbal inhibition for either group. Generalized linear mixed-model analyses suggested no significant group differences in manual or verbal inhibition. Manual and verbal inhibition did not predict SSI-4 in AWS. However, verbal inhibition was uniquely associated with OASES scores. Conclusion Although underlying manual and verbal inhibition was comparable between AWS and AWNS, verbal inhibition may be linked to the adverse experience of stuttering rather than the overt symptoms of stuttering severity. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.15145185

Non-word repetition is weaker for adults who stutter (AWS) compared to adults who do not stutter (AWNS) as phonological demands increase. However, non-word stimuli used in previous studies varied by length, but did not vary with regard to segmental or metrical complexity. The purpose of the present study was to examine the unique influence of these two distinct types of complexity on non-word repetition in AWS and AWNS via administration of the Test of Phonological Structure (TOPhS). Twenty-four adults (12 AWNS, 12 AWS) repeated 96 non-words within a soundproof booth immediately after auditory presentation. All 96 non-word targets included on the TOPhS were one to four syllables in length and ranked based on segmental complexity (simple, moderate and complex) and metrical complexity (simple, moderate and complex). No main effect of metrical complexity was detected between groups, and no differences in accuracy were observed for non-words with simple or moderate segmental complexity. However, AWS were significantly more likely to produce a phonemic error when repeating words with complex segmental structure than AWNS, irrespective of metrical complexity. Segmental complexity may contribute to the differences in phonological working memory in AWS when controlling for metrical complexity and length.

No abstract

Emotional arousal and regulation in children who stutter Empirical studies have reported that various aspects of emotional arousal and emotion regulation differ between CWS and CWNS, as reported by parents on standardized questionnaires [4,6,7,12,13]. For example, Anderson et al. [4] found CWS exhibit less adaptability, less distractibility, and less rhythmicity than fluent peers. Eggers et al. [12] reported that CWS scored higher on anger and frustration on interrupted tasks, positive excitement when anticipating a forthcoming, pleasurable activity, and exhibited excess motor movements like nail biting, fidgeting and blinking. Karrass et al. [7] reported greater emotional reactivity, greater difficulty regulating emotions, and lower attention regulation for CWS. Seery et al. [13] reported that CWS exhibit lower adapt-The purpose of this study was to examine the relation between daily emotions and stuttering. Daily data was acquired over an academic year from a three-year-old boy near onset of stuttering. The boy's caregiver provided daily ratings regarding fluency and emotionality of the child during the four greatest emotional events of the child's day. Each event was rated with respect to (a) event intensity, (b) emotional intensity, and (c) stuttering frequency. Results showed that daily ratings of stuttering frequency, as reported by the child's caregiver, were related to event intensity rather than the child's emotional intensity. Emotional intensity was related to stuttering frequency for negative emotions only. Thus, event intensity may contribute to both emotional arousal and stuttering.