The effect of SpeechEasy on stuttering frequency, speech rate, and speech naturalness

Armson, Joy; Kiefte, Michael

doi:10.1016/j.jfludis.2008.04.002

Cited by 35 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This condition produced 44% of stuttering reduction, on average. In comparison, 67% stuttering reduction during monologue speech production was obtained by , 30% by Armson et al (2006), and 60.7% by Armson and Kiefte (2008). In these studies a SpeechEasy device was used to alter auditory feedback.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of altered auditory feedback (AAF) on stuttering frequency during monologue speech production

Antipova

Purdy

Blakeley

et al. 2008

Journal of Fluency Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study investigated the immediate effects of eight altered auditory feedback (AAF) parameters on stuttering frequency during monologue speech production on two occasions. One of the modern commercially available portable anti-stuttering devices, "The Pocket Speech Lab" (Casa Futura Technologies ® ) was used in the study to produce the auditory feedback alterations. Six types of combined delayed auditory feedback (DAF) and frequency shifted auditory feedback (FAF) and two types of DAF alone were tested for eight participants aged 16-55 years, with stuttering severity ranging from mild to severe. The present study found that AAF is an effective means to reduce stuttering frequency during monologue speech production. All eight AAF experimental conditions reduced stuttering frequency, however, there was substantial variability in the stuttering reduction effect across experimental conditions and across participants. There was also instability in stuttering reduction across the two testing sessions. On average, a 75 ms time delay on its own and a combination of the 75 ms time delay and a half octave downward frequency shift were found to be more effective than other combinations of AAF parameters that were investigated.Educational objectives: After reading this paper, the reader should be able to (1) summarize the research investigating the effect of altered auditory feedback on stuttering frequency during monologue speech production; (2) describe the stuttering reduction effect of the eight parameters of AAF tested during monologue speech production; and (3) discuss the possible clinical implications of the use of AAF for stuttering treatment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Individual selection of AAF parameters was also applied in two recent studies O'Donnel, Armson, & Kiefte, 2008). Armson and Kiefte (2008) examined effectiveness of AAF during reading and monologue in 31 adults. On average, stuttering frequency reduction was 78.8% for reading and 60.7% for monologue.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of altered auditory feedback (AAF) on stuttering frequency during monologue speech production

Antipova

Purdy

Blakeley

et al. 2008

Journal of Fluency Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The interventions with longer contact time (perhaps unsurprisingly) tended to be those with multiple elements. 118 Armson and Stuart 1998, 119 Armson and Kiefte 2008, 120 Armson et al 19 Harris et al…”

Section: Intervention Dosagementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order to avoid potential confusion between different authors' use of terminology, we adopted the classification below which endeavours to categorise the approaches taken within the included studies. The categorisation consists of seven typologies: (1) feedback and technology interventions which aim to change auditory feedback systems (22 papers 4,17,35,36,43,44,48,52,56,60,87,92,[101][102][103]105,[118][119][120][124][125][126] ); (2) cognitive interventions which aim to lead to psychological change (six papers 18,30,66,67,76,93 ); (3) behavioural modification interventions which aim to change child or parental behaviour, or the behaviour of an adult who stutters ( 16,20,21,28,54,94,97,111 ).…”

Section: Assessment Of Clinical Effectiveness Analysed By Interventiomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…, 22 Hudock and Kalinowski 2014, 60 Jones et al 2000, 65 Kaya 2011, 67 Kingston et al 2003, 68 Koushik et al 2011, 69 Lattermann et al 2008, 26 Nilsen and Ramberg 1999, 83 Onslow et al 2002, 123 Ratynska et al 2012, 124 Reddy et al 2010, 93 Unger et al 16 Druce and Debney 1997, 49 Hancock and Craig 1998, 20 Hancock et al 1998, 21 Kaya and Alladin 2012, 66 Langevin and Boberg 1993, 71 Langevin and Boberg 1996, 72 Lewis et al 2008, 27 Mallard 1998, 79 Menzies et al 2008, 28 Millard et al Craig et al 1996, 16 Craig et al 2002, 47 Cream et al 2009, 48 Cream et al 2010, 17 Druce and Debney 1997, 49 Franklin et al 2008, 19 Hancock and Craig 1998, 20 Hancock and Craig 2002, 57 Hancock et al 1998, 21 Harris et al 86 Onslow et al 1994, 29 Onslow et al 1990, 88 Onslow et al 1992, 89 Onslow et al 1996, 90 Canada (11) Armson and Stuart 1998, 119 Armson and Kiefte 2008, 120 Armson et al 2006, 4 Gagnon and Ladouceur 1992, 55 Koushik et al 2009, 69 Langevin and Boberg...…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Non-pharmacological treatments for stuttering in children and adults: a systematic review and evaluation of clinical effectiveness, and exploration of barriers to successful outcomes

Baxter

Johnson

Blank

et al. 2016

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDespite many years of research, there is no certainty regarding the cause of stuttering. Although numerous interventions have been developed, a broad-based systematic review across all forms of intervention for adults and children was needed including views and perceptions of people who stutter.ObjectiveThe aims of the study were to report the clinical effectiveness of interventions for people who stutter (or clutter), to examine evidence regarding the views of people who stutter and the views of professionals regarding interventions.Data sourcesA systematic review of quantitative and qualitative literature was carried out between August 2013 and April 2014. The following electronic databases were searched: (1) MEDLINE, (2) EMBASE, (3) The Cochrane Library (including The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment Database and NHS Economic Evaluations Database), (4) PsycINFO, (5) Science Citation Index, (6) Social Science Citation Index, (7) Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, (8) ASSIA, (9) Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts, (10) Sociological Abstracts and (11) the EPPI Centre. Reference lists of included papers and other reviews were screened and also key journals in the subject area were hand-searched.Review methodsThe searches aimed to identify (1) evidence of clinical effectiveness in populations of pre-school children, school-aged children, adolescents and adults, and (2) data relating to perceptions of barriers and facilitators to intervention clinical effectiveness among staff and people who stutter. A metasynthesis of the two linked elements via development of a conceptual model was also carried out to provide further interpretation of the review findings.ResultsA systematic search of the literature identified a large number of potentially relevant studies. Of these, 111 studies examining the clinical effectiveness of interventions, 25 qualitative papers and one mixed-methods paper met the criteria for inclusion in this review. Review of the effectiveness literature indicated evidence of positive outcomes across all types of interventions. Virtually all evidence we identified reported at least some positive effect for some participants. However, there was evidence of considerable individual variation in outcome for study participants. The qualitative literature highlighted the need for programmes to be tailored to individual need with variation at the levels of the intervention, the individual and interpersonal/social elements. Metasynthesis of the data highlighted the complexity of elements that need to be considered in evaluation of long-term impacts following stuttering interventions.LimitationsAround two-thirds of the studies were considered to be at higher risk of bias. The heterogeneous nature and variability in outcomes meant that we were unable to complete a meta-analysis.ConclusionsAlthough much of the evidence we identified was from studies at risk of bias, it is suggested that most available interventions for stuttering may be of benefit to at least some people who stutter. There is a requirement for greater clarity regarding what the core outcomes following stuttering intervention should be and also enhanced understanding of the process whereby interventions effect change. Further analysis of those for whom interventions have not produced a significant benefit may provide additional insights into the complex intervention–outcomes pathway.Study registrationThis study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013004861.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

show abstract

Auditory Feedback Control of Vocal Pitch in Spasmodic Dysphonia

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives/Hypothesis Hearing plays an important role in the maintenance of vocal control in normal individuals. In patients with spasmodic dysphonia (SD), however, the ability to maintain sustained control of phonation is impaired. The origins of SD are unknown, and it is unclear whether auditory feedback‐dependent vocal control is compromised in these patients. Study Design Prospective case‐control study. Methods We tested 15 SD patients and 11 age‐matched controls. Voice recordings were performed while subjects repeated the vowel /e/ and auditory feedback of their vocal sounds was altered in real‐time to introduce a pitch‐shift (±2 semitones), presented back to subjects using headphones. Recordings were analyzed to determine voice changes following the pitch‐shifted feedback. Results were further compared with patient demographics and subjective measures of dysphonia, including the Voice Handicap Index (VHI). Results Despite considerable pitch variability and vocal breaks, SD patients exhibited significantly higher average vocal pitch compensation than control subjects. SD patients also exhibited greater variability than controls. However, there were no significant correlations between vocal compensation and patient demographics, although there was a significant inverse correlation with VHI. Conclusions In this pilot study, patients with SD exhibited increased sensitivity to altered auditory feedback during sustained phonation. These results are consistent with recent theories of SD as a disorder of sensory‐motor feedback processing, and suggest possible avenues for future investigation. Level of Evidence 3 Laryngoscope, 131:2070–2075, 2021

show abstract

The effect of SpeechEasy on stuttering frequency, speech rate, and speech naturalness

Cited by 35 publications

References 19 publications

Effects of altered auditory feedback (AAF) on stuttering frequency during monologue speech production

Effects of altered auditory feedback (AAF) on stuttering frequency during monologue speech production

Non-pharmacological treatments for stuttering in children and adults: a systematic review and evaluation of clinical effectiveness, and exploration of barriers to successful outcomes

Auditory Feedback Control of Vocal Pitch in Spasmodic Dysphonia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About