Investigations of the impact of altered auditory feedback in-the-ear devices on the speech of people who stutter: One-year follow-up

Stuart, Andrew; Kalinowski, Joseph; Saltuklaroglu, Tim; Guntupalli, V. K.

doi:10.1080/09638280500386635

Cited by 40 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 30 publications

(39 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Seven years following the initial commercial availability of SpeechEasy, there have been three systematic studies that address its efficacy (Armson et al, 2006;Stuart, Kalinowski, Rastatter, Saltuklaroglu, & Dayalu, 2004;Stuart, Kalinowski, Saltuklaroglu, & Guntupalli, 2006). Specifically, these studies have shown that: (1) speech produced using SpeechEasy was perceived as more natural sounding than speech produced without the device (Stuart et al, , 2006; (2) significant stuttering reduction occurred with SpeechEasy relative to conditions without the device (Armson et al, 2006;Stuart et al, 2004Stuart et al, , 2006; and (3) significant reductions in core stuttering behaviours were reported following 12 months of SpeechEasy use (Stuart et al, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Specifically, these studies have shown that: (1) speech produced using SpeechEasy was perceived as more natural sounding than speech produced without the device (Stuart et al, , 2006; (2) significant stuttering reduction occurred with SpeechEasy relative to conditions without the device (Armson et al, 2006;Stuart et al, 2004Stuart et al, , 2006; and (3) significant reductions in core stuttering behaviours were reported following 12 months of SpeechEasy use (Stuart et al, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…With respect to effects in SDL, information has been gathered in a variety of ways: an autobiographical account of one person's experiences with SpeechEasy (Kalinowski, 2003), a survey of client satisfaction (Kalinowski, Guntupalli, Stuart, & Saltuklaroglu, 2004), and a self-report inventory (Stuart et al, 2006). None of the methodologies employed to date involve direct observation of SpeechEasy's effect on fluency during everyday activities.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The effectiveness of SpeechEasy during situations of daily living

O'Donnell

Armson

Kiefte

2008

Journal of Fluency Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 97%

mentioning

confidence: 97%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The effectiveness of SpeechEasy during situations of daily living

O'Donnell

Armson

Kiefte

2008

Journal of Fluency Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…While Martin et al (1984) found no difference in naturalness in people who stutter under non-altered feedback compared to DAF, Stuart and Kalinowski (2004) and Stuart et al (2006) found speech significantly more natural sounding with the device than without the device. Perhaps this divergent findings result from the use of a different delay time (250ms in the study of Martin et al1984 versus 50ms and 60ms in the study of Kalinowski, 2004 andStuart et al 2006 respectively) and maybe also the combination with frequency altered feedback (+ 500Hz in the study of Stuart et al 2006). Natke (2000) suggested that the critical delay time with respect to naturalness lies at 100 ms, above which speech would start to sound unnatural.…”

Section: Speech Modementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the nine participants in the study by Van Borsel et al (2003) repeated exposure to DAF continued to promote fluency over a 3 month period but there was no evidence that length of exposure and fluency enhancement were in a linear relationship. Using DAF in combination with FAF (frequency altered feedback) in nine people who stutter, Stuart et al (2006) found that the proportions of stuttering events were significantly reduced at initial fitting and remained so 12 months post follow-up. A number of studies in individuals with dysfluencies of neurogenic origin reported mixed results.…”

Section: Othersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Realimentação auditiva atrasada e tratamento de gagueira: evidências a serem consideradas

Borsel

Sierens

Pereira

2007

Pró-Fono R. Atual. Cient.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: there is some indication that the use of delayed auditory feedback (DAF) is a potentially helpful technique in the treatment of stuttering. Several devices for DAF are also commercially. However, not all individuals who stutter experience a positive effect on speech fluency when speaking under DAF. And those who do show a positive effect, may differ considerably as to the degree and the conditions in which the effect is seen. Therefore, the decision whether or not to attempt the use of DAF in an given client is usually not straightforward. Aim: starting from a literature review, the present paper discusses and illustrates factors to take into account when considering the use of RAA in an individual client. Four types of factors are distinguished: factors inherent to the client such as gender, age, stuttering severity, dysfluency pattern, origin of stuttering, and biological subtype; factors outside the client including delay time, intensity, manner of delivery, speech mode, and speech situation; possible side-effects like a reduction in speech rate, an increase of speaking fundamental frequency and vocal intensity, lengthening of vowels, and a possible effect on speech naturalness; others namely cosmetics, finances, and the long-term effect. Conclusion: the review shows that most likely multiple factors play a role, but with the currently available data it is very hard to predict whether a given individual will or will not benefit from the use of DAF. Overall, the evidence for the influence of the different factors is still meager. Moreover, some studies present data of a quality that can hardly be considered "evidence". Key Words: Stuttering; Treatment; Delayed Auditory Feedback. ResumoTema: a realimentação auditiva atrasada (RAA) é ao que parece, uma técnica que tem sido utilizada no tratamento da gagueira com bons resultados. Muitos aparelhos de RAA são comercializados. No entanto, nem todas as pessoas que gaguejam experimentam melhora na fluência da fala ao utilizar a RAA e quando os efeitos são positivos observam-se diferenças consideráveis em relação ao grau e às condições em que a melhora na fala ocorreu. Neste sentido, a decisão de utilizar ou não a RAA no tratamento de um cliente nem sempre é óbvia. Objetivo: o presente artigo se propõe a discutir e ilustrar fatores a serem considerados, no que se refere à utilização da RAA em terapia individual, com base em uma revisão de literatura. Quatro tipos de fatores são apresentados: fatores inerentes ao cliente, tais como sexo, idade, severidade de gagueira, tipologia da disfluência, origem da gagueira e tipo biológico; fatores externos ao cliente, como o tempo de retorno da informação auditiva, intensidade, modo de apresentação, modalidade e situação de fala; possíveis efeitos colaterais como redução da velocidade de fala, aumento da freqüência fundamental e da intensidade vocal, prolongamento de vogais e um possível efeito na naturalidade fala; outros fatores como questões estéticas, questões financeiras e duração do efeito na fala. Concl...

show abstract

Assessment and Treatment of Stuttering Using Altered Auditory Feedback

Saltuklaroglu¹

2012

The Science and Practice of Stuttering Treatment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Investigations of the impact of altered auditory feedback in-the-ear devices on the speech of people who stutter: One-year follow-up

Cited by 40 publications

References 30 publications

The effectiveness of SpeechEasy during situations of daily living

The effectiveness of SpeechEasy during situations of daily living

Realimentação auditiva atrasada e tratamento de gagueira: evidências a serem consideradas

Assessment and Treatment of Stuttering Using Altered Auditory Feedback

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About