An exploratory factor analysis of action responses to stuttering anticipation

Jackson, Eric S.; Rodgers, Naomi H.; Rodgers, Derek B.

doi:10.1016/j.jfludis.2019.03.001

Cited by 17 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Overt stuttering is an undesired action because of its associated negative consequences. Therefore, individuals who stutter employ proactive inhibitory control to cope with impending stuttering, and will often implement learned strategies such as modifying the speech plan to circumvent the anticipated word (e.g., by stalling or switching a word) [18,27,28]. This is consistent with the finding of delayed speech initiation times for anticipated words in Jackson et al (2022).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 72%

“…However, we argue that the theoretical foundation for a right pre-SMA response is strong, not only in light of the action-stopping literature [26,31,52] and our task design but also of our previous work on anticipation [17,18,27] and the experience of people who stutter [3,4]. Second, we did not directly measure anticipation during the MEG experiment primarily because there is currently no feasible way to do so.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reactive Inhibitory Control Precedes Overt Stuttering Events

Orpella

Flick

Assaneo

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research points to neurofunctional differences underlying fluent speech production in stutterers and non-stutterers. There has been considerably less work focusing on the processes that underlie stuttered speech, primarily due to the difficulty of reliably eliciting stuttering in the unnatural contexts associated with neuroimaging experiments. We used magnetoencephalography (MEG) to test the hypothesis that stuttering events result from global motor inhibition–a “freeze” response typically characterized by increased beta power in nodes of the action-stopping network. We leveraged a novel clinical interview to develop participant-specific stimuli in order to elicit a comparable amount of stuttered and fluent trials. Twenty-nine adult stutterers participated. The paradigm included a cue prior to a go signal, which allowed us to isolate processes associated with stuttered and fluent trials prior to speech initiation. During this pre-speech time window, stuttered trials were associated with greater beta power in the right pre-supplementary motor area, a key node in the action-stopping network, compared to fluent trials. Beta power in the right pre-supplementary area was related to a clinical measure of stuttering severity. We also found that anticipated words identified independently by participants were stuttered more often than those generated by the researchers, which were based on the participants’ reported anticipated sounds. This suggests that global motor inhibition results from stuttering anticipation. This study represents the largest comparison of stuttered and fluent speech to date. The findings provide a foundation for clinical trials that test the efficacy of neuromodulation on stuttering. Moreover, our study demonstrates the feasibility of using our approach for eliciting stuttering during MEG and functional magnetic resonance imaging experiments so that the neurobiological bases of stuttered speech can be further elucidated.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 72%

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Reactive Inhibitory Control Precedes Overt Stuttering Events

Orpella

Flick

Assaneo

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, spatial precision of MEG is limited and therefore we cannot be certain that activation emanated from the R-preSMA specifically. We argue that the theoretical foundation for an R-preSMA response is strong, in light not only of the action-stopping literature ( Aron, 2011 ; Hannah & Aron, 2021 ; Jana et al, 2020 ) and our task design but also of our previous work on anticipation ( Jackson et al, 2015 ; Jackson et al, 2019 ; Jackson et al, 2022 ) and the experience of people who stutter ( Tichenor & Yaruss, 2018 , 2019 ). Nevertheless, it is possible that the beta differences between stuttered and fluent trials we observed are associated with neighboring cortical sites such as the R-DLPFC, also implicated in inhibitory control ( Hannah & Aron, 2021 ; Jahanshahi et al, 2015 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…Overt stuttering is an undesired action because of its associated negative consequences. Therefore, individuals who stutter employ proactive inhibitory control to cope with impending stuttering and will often implement learned strategies, such as modifying the speech plan, to circumvent the anticipated word (e.g., by stalling or switching a word; Jackson et al, 2015 ; Jackson et al, 2018 ; Jackson et al, 2019 ). This is consistent with the finding of delayed speech initiation times for anticipated words in Jackson et al (2022) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reactive Inhibitory Control Precedes Overt Stuttering Events

Orpella,

Flick,

Assaneo

et al. 2024

Neurobiology of Language

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research points to neurofunctional differences underlying fluent speech between stutterers and non-stutterers. Considerably less work has focused on processes that underlie stuttered vs. fluent speech. Additionally, most of this research has focused on speech motor processes despite contributions from cognitive processes prior to the onset of stuttered speech. We used MEG to test the hypothesis that reactive inhibitory control is triggered prior to stuttered speech. Twenty-nine stutterers completed a delayed-response task that featured a cue (prior to a go cue) signaling the imminent requirement to produce a word that was either stuttered or fluent. Consistent with our hypothesis, we observed increased beta power likely emanating from the R-preSMA—an area implicated in reactive inhibitory control—in response to the cue preceding stuttered vs. fluent productions. Beta power differences between stuttered and fluent trials correlated with stuttering severity and participants' percentage of trials stuttered increased exponentially with beta power in the R-preSMA. Trial-by-trial beta power modulations in the R-preSMA following the cue predicted whether a trial would be stuttered or fluent. Stuttered trials were also associated with delayed speech onset suggesting an overall slowing or freezing of the speech motor system that may be a consequence of inhibitory control. Post-hoc analyses revealed that independently-generated anticipated words were associated with greater beta power and more stuttering than researcher-assisted anticipated words, pointing to a relationship between self-perceived likelihood of stuttering (i.e., anticipation) and inhibitory control. This work offers a neurocognitive account of stuttering by characterizing cognitive processes that precede overt stuttering events.

show abstract

“…This anticipation of impending struggle naturally motivates them to avoid particular sounds and words that they have learned to associate with stuttering. Specific strategies for avoiding moments of stuttering include word substitutions, circumlocuting (i.e., mazing), changing topics, using interjections such as "um" and "uh" prior to an anticipated instance of stuttering, or avoiding speaking altogether (Jackson, Gerlach, Rodgers, & Zebrowski, 2018;Jackson, Yaruss, Quesal, Terranova, & Whalen, 2015;Jackson, Rodgers, & Rodgers, 2019). As such, verbal communication can be stripped of the spontaneity and effortlessness that non-stuttering speakers enjoy.…”

Section: Chapter 1: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive bias and stuttering in adolescence

Rodgers¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

balance during this process. You have been a steady reminder of what is most importantto live in the moment and to love without abandon. Hope, I am so grateful to have been on this adventure with you. Your friendship has been an abundant source of comfort and inspiration, and I am hopeful that we can continue to support each other throughout our careers. Last but certainly not least, Mom and Dad, your transatlantic migration decades ago to provide a better life and top-notch education for your children was braver than anything I have ever done, and I am so grateful to have been the beneficiary of your dreams. I love you all to the moon. Many thanks to the speech-language pathologists who graciously helped me recruit participants for this project, and to the adolescents who participated.

show abstract

An exploratory factor analysis of action responses to stuttering anticipation

Cited by 17 publications

References 37 publications

Reactive Inhibitory Control Precedes Overt Stuttering Events

Reactive Inhibitory Control Precedes Overt Stuttering Events

Reactive Inhibitory Control Precedes Overt Stuttering Events

Cognitive bias and stuttering in adolescence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About