Marta Węsierska, Kenneth O. St.Louis
Comparison of attitudes towardsstuttering among Polish and Englishuniversity studentsChowanna 1, 263-284
2014
Marta WęsierskaUniversityof York,UK
Kenneth O. St. LouisWestVirginiaUniversity,Morgantown,USA
Comparison of attitudes towards stuttering among Polish and English university students
Introduction
Facts about Stuttering
AccordingtoBloodstein,1itisnearlyimpossibletodevelopunambigu-ousdefinitionsofstutteringandfluency.Stutteringisadisruptionoffluency inspeech,usuallyoccurringat the initialsoundsorwords ina sentence,oratwords/clauseboundaries.Threemainpatternsofstut-teringaretypicallyreported,thatisrepetitionsofsoundsandsyllables(usuallythreeormoretimes),soundprolongations,andblocksfollowedbyaburstofsounds.Oftensecondarybehaviourssuchastensioninlips,jawsorcheeksorclosingeyesortappingwithfingers(e.g.onadesk)aresometimespresent.Malesaremorelikelytostutterthanfemales.2Stut-teringusuallybeginsbetweentheagesoftwoandfour.Approximately5%ofallchildrengothroughaperiodofstutteringthatlastssixmonthsormore.Three-quartersofthosewillrecoverbylatechildhood,whichmeansthatforabout1%ofchildrentheproblembecomesalong-termone.3
1 O. Bloodstein: “On pluttering, skivering and floggering: a commentary.”Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders,1990,vol.55,pp.392–393.
2 B. Guitar: Stuttering: An integrated approach to its nature and treatment.Bal-timore:LippincottWilliams&Wilkins,2006.
3 D. Ward: Stuttering and Cluttering. Frameworks for understanding and treat-ment.Hove:PsychologyPress,2006.
MartaWęsierska,KennethO.St.Louis264
Eventhoughithastobeadmittedthattheexactcausesofstutteringarenotknown,researchersagreethatitlikelyresultsfromaninteractionoffactorsincludingchilddevelopment,familydynamics,genetics,andneurophysiology.4
Public Attitudes toward Stuttering
Thefollowingreviewwillshowthatextensiveresearchhasdemonstratedthatnon-stutteringmembersofthepublicholdnegativeorstigmatiz-ingattitudestowardsthosewhodostutter.Researchershaveexploredattitudestowardsstutteringamongdifferentgroups,suchasparents,5teachers,6students,7andemployers.8
Need for a Standard Measure of Public Attitudes
Comparisonoffindingsacrossinvestigationsisdifficultduetotheuseoflargelydifferentscalesandquestionnaires.Aswillbecomeapparent,eventhoughanextensiveliteraturefromdifferentculturesandcountriesexists,untilrecentlynostandardandwidelyacceptedpublicopinioninstrumentshavebeenavailable.ThePublicOpinionSurveyofHumanAttributes-Stuttering(POSHA-S)wascreatedtoaddressthisneed.Inthe POSHA-S, stuttering is compared to other stigmatized attributes(i.e.obesityandmentalhealth),aneutralattribute(i.e.left-handedness),andapositiveattribute(i.e.intelligence).Allthesurveyquestionsarewordedinadirectandneutralmannerandtheuseofidiomaticexpres-sionsisminimizedinordertoaidreadingcomprehensionaswellastoreduceculturalbiasandprovideformostaccuratetranslations.Thetoolhasbeenshowntobeaccuratelytranslatable,9andtomanifestsatisfac-
4 B.GuitarB:Stuttering…5 T.A. Crowe, E.B. Cooper: “Parental attitudes toward and knowledge of
stuttering.”Journal of Communication Disorders,1977,vol.10,pp.343–357.6 T.A. Crowe, J.H. Walton: “Teacherattitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of
Fluency Disorders,1981,vol.6,pp.163–174.7 K.O. St. Louis, N.J. Lass: “A survey of communicative disorders stu-
dents’ attitudes toward stuttering.” Journal of Fluency Disorders, 1981, vol. 6,pp.49–80.
8 M.A. Hurst, E.B. Cooper: “Employerattitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1983,vol.8,pp.1–12.
9 K.O.St. Louis,P.M.Roberts:“Measuringattitudestowardstuttering:En-glish-to-FrenchtranslationsinCanadaandCameroon.”Journal of Communication Disorders,2010,vol.43,pp.361–377.
Comparisonofattitudestowardsstuttering… 265
torytest-retestreliability,constructvalidity,userfriendliness,andef-ficiency.10
A Sampling of Research on Public Attitudes
AstudybyBetz,BloodandBlood11investigatedstudentattitudestowardsstuttering,focusingonstutteringinpre-schoolersandkindergartenpu-pils.Universitystudentsassignedsignificantlymorenegativeratingstoachildasyoungasthreeyearsofagebasedonastatementinascenarioaboutthechildinwhich“He/shestutters”wasincluded.
Otherstudieshaveshownthatnegativeattitudesalsohavebeenat-tributedtoyouth,adolescentsoradults.Forexample,Craig,TranandCraig12investigatedtheattitudestowardstutteringofthosewhohaveneverdirectlymetanyonewiththedisorder.Theyreportedthatamajor-ityoftheiradultparticipantsbelievedthatpeoplewhostutterareshy,self-conscious,anxious,andlackinginconfidence.Theydemonstratedlittleknowledgeofthecausesofstutteringbutbelievedtheywouldnotfeelembarrassedwhiletalkingtosomeonewhostutters.Toexplainsomeofthenegativeattitudes,Craig,TranandCraighypothesizedthatitwaslikelythattheparticipantsbasedtheiropinionsoninferenceor,alterna-tively,projectedtheirownstereotypicbeliefsorexpectedreactionsontothestutterers.Ontheotherhand,evenparticipantswhohadnevermetapersonwhostuttersseemedtohaveanappreciationforthedifficulties
10 Cf. T.W. Flynn, K.O. St. Louis: An investigation of adolescent opinions on stuttering.PosterpresentedatAnnualConventionoftheAmericanSpeech–Lan-guage–HearingAssociation,Boston,MA,2007;K.O. St. Louis etal.:“Develop-mentofaprototypequestionnairetosurveypublicattitudestowardstuttering:Principlesandmethodologiesinthefirstprototype.”The Internet Journal of Epide-miology,2008,vol.5(2);K.O. St. Louis etal.:“Developmentofaprototypeque-stionnairetosurveypublicattitudestowardstuttering:Reliabilityofthesecondprototype.” Contemporary Issues in Communication Sciences and Disorders, 2009,vol.36,pp.101–107;K.O. St. Louis etal.:“Developmentofaprototypequestion-nairetosurveypublicattitudestowardstuttering:Constructvalidity.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2009,vol.34,pp.11–28;K.O.St. Louis:“Researchanddevelop-ment forapublicattitude instrument forstuttering.” Journal of Communication Disorders,2012,vol.45,pp.129–146.
11 I.R. Betz, G.W. Blood, I.M. Blood: “Universitystudents’perceptionsofpre-schoolandkindergartenchildrenwhostutter.”Journal of Communication Dis- orders,2007,vol.41,pp.259–273.
12 A. Craig, Y. Tran, M. Craig: “Stereotypestowardsstutteringforthosewhohaveneverhaddirectcontactwithpeoplewhostutter:Arandomizedandstratifiedstudy.”Perceptual and Motor Skills,2003,vol.97,pp.235–245.
MartaWęsierska,KennethO.St.Louis266
ofthedisordersuchasnotbeingabletotalkfluentlyandhavingtofacesocialembarrassment.
AstudybyHughesetal.13withasampleofuniversitystudents,exploredhowfluentspeakersperceivedpeoplewhostutterfromtwoperspectives,thatistheirbeliefsontheeffectsofstutteringonthelifeofapersonandhowsuchaperson’slifewouldbeaffectediftheystuttered.Theresultsindicatedthatstudentsperceivestutteringtohavebothgeneralandspe-cificnegativeeffectsforpeoplewhostutter.Theybelievedthatpeoplewhostutterareavoided,teased,anddiscriminatedagainst.Accordingtotheresearchers,however,fluentspeakersdonotbelievepeoplestutterbecausetheyareinherentlyshy,nervous,anxious,orfrustrated(constructsthatareexploredinthePOSHA-S).
Hughes14summarizedstudiesofattitudestowardsstutteringinmalesversusfemales,focusingonthesexoftherespondentaswellasthesexofthepersonwhostutters.Thisresearchestablishedthatthepartici-pantsbelievedtraitssuchasshyness,nervousnessorfrustrationwerenotinherentforpeoplewithstuttering(PWS)butratheracquiredovertimeasaresultofthenegativesocialreactionstheyhadexperienced.Theparticipantsprovidedpositivedescriptionsofpeoplewhostutterlargelyassociatedwiththeircomparabilitytoaverageindividualsandbelievedthemtobemorepatientandacceptingduetotheirdisorder.Hughesdidnot,however,findthenumberofstatementstothesurveyquestionstodifferwithrespecttothesexofthepersonwhostutters.Shecontrastedherresultswiththoseof(a)PattersonandPring,15wherenodifferenceswerefoundtowardseithersexofpeoplewhostutterregardlessofthesexoftherespondent,(b)BurleyandRinaldi,16wheremorenegativeattitudeswerereportedbymalerespondentscomparedtofemalere-spondents,and(c)WeiselandSpektor,17wheremorenegativeattitudeswereobservedtowardsmalesthantowardsfemales.UsingthePOSHA-S,
13 S. Hughes etal.:“Universitystudents’explanationsfortheirdescriptionsofpeoplewhostutter:Anexploratorymixedmodelstudy.”Journal of Fluency Dis- orders,2010,vol.35,pp.280–298.
14 S. Hughes: Exploring attitudes toward people who stutter: A mixed model ap-proach.Unpublisheddissertation.BowlingGreen,OH:BowlingGreenStateUni-versity,2008.
15 J. Patterson, T. Pring: “Listenerattitudestostutteringspeakers:Noevi-denceforagenderdifference.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1991,vol.16,pp.201–205.
16 P.M. Burley, W. Rinaldi: “Effects of sex of listener and of stutterer onratingsofstutteringspeakers.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1986,vol.17,pp. 329–333.
17 A. Weisel, G. Sektor: “Apossibleexplanationofthe‘stutterer’stereoty-pe.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1998,vol.23,pp.157–172.
Comparisonofattitudestowardsstuttering… 267
St.Louis18concludedthatmalesandfemalesdonotholdsignificantlydifferentattitudestowardsstuttering.
International Comparisons of Stuttering Attitudes
InternationalstudieswiththeuseofthePOSHA-Shavebeencarriedoutinmanycountriesaroundtheworld,suchasTurkey,19Kuwait,20andChi-na(HongKong).21Employingaschool-based,representativeprobabilitysamplingschemeinOzdemir,St.Louis,Topbas,22thePOSHA-Swasad-ministered toelementaryschoolchildrenandtheirrelativesandneigh-boursfromtwoneighbourhoods.Attitudestowardsstutteringwereverysimilaramongthegenerationsandbetweenthetworepeatedsamples.TheattitudestowardstutteringweregenerallylesspositivefortheTurkishrespondentswhencomparedtoattitudesfromotherstudiesconductedinternationally.AbdallaandSt.Louis23usedamodifiedPOSHA-Stoin-vestigatetheattitudestowardsstutteringamongteachersinKuwait.Theresultsshowedthateventhoughmanyoftheparticipantsknewapersonwhostutters,theywereoftenmisinformedaboutthecausesofstutter-ingandheldstereotypicalviewsaboutthedisorder. Ipetal.24conductedastudyinvestigatingtheattitudestowardsstutteringamongaconveniencesampleinHongKongandMainlandChina.Meanratingsofrespondentswerereportedtobesimilarinmostcomparisons.WhencomparedtoothermeanvaluesinthePOSHA-Sdatabase(consistingofnumerouscountriesandlanguages25),theChineserespondentsmanifestedlower(worse)at-titudesthanthemediansamplepreviouslyanalysed.Overall,thesethreestudiesdocumentedaspectsofnegativestereotypesandpotentialstigma
18 K.O.St. Louis:“Maleversusfemaleattitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of Communication Disorders,2012,vol.45,pp.246–253.
19 R.S. Ozdemir, K.O. St. Louis, S. Topbas: “Stuttering attitudes amongTurkishfamilygenerationsandneighborsfromrepresentativesamples.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2011,vol.36,pp.318–333.
20 F.A. Abdalla, K.O. St. Louis: “Arabschoolteachers’knowledge,beliefsand reactions regarding stuttering.” Journal of Fluency Disorders, 2012, vol. 37,pp.54–69.
21 M.L. Ip etal.:“StutteringattitudesinHongKongandadjacentMainlandChina.”Journal of Speech-Language Pathology,2012,vol.14,pp.543–556.
22 R.S.Ozdemir,K.O.St. Louis,S.Topbas:“Stutteringattitudes…”23 F.A. Abdalla, K.O.St. Louis: “Arabschoolteachers’knowledge…”24 M.L. Ipetal.:“StutteringattitudesinHongKong…”25 K.O. St. Louis: “The Public Opinion Survey of Human Attributes-Stut-
tering(POSHA-S):Summaryframeworkandempiricalcomparisons.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2011,vol.36,pp.256–261.
MartaWęsierska,KennethO.St.Louis268
withrespecttopeoplewhostutter.Bycontrast,Pachigar,Stansfield,andGoldbart26exploredtheattitudesofprimaryschoolteachersinIndiato-wardsstuttering.Thisstudydevelopeditsownquestionnairespecifictothesampleinvestigated,basedonothersalreadyexistinginthefield.Theresponsesshowedagenerallypositiveattitudetowardspeoplewhostutter.Theteachersalsoclaimedtheytreatpupilswhostutterthesamewaytheywouldtreatotherchildren,alsointermsofpublicspeaking.
ThePOSHA-Scomparesstutteringtootherattributesandconditions.St.Louis27presentedselectedfindingsfrompilotstudiesthatusedanex-perimentalversionofthePOSHA-Sfromninesamples:AmericanSLPswhoweregeneralists,AmericanSLPswhowerefluencyspecialists,Ameri-canstudents,andadultsfromDenmark,SouthAfrica,Nepal,Brazil,Bul-gariaandTurkey.Thelastthreesampleswerefromtranslatedquestion-naires.ParticipantsfromthesixcountriesshowedsimilaritiestoprofilesofadultsintheUSaswellassomeinterestingvariations.Forexample,theimpressionofstutteringwasthelowestitemscoredfortheTurkishrespondentswhileBrazilianandBulgarianadultsbothscoredmentalill-nessasthelowest.TheAmericanSLPsagreedongeneticsbeingacauseofstuttering.Intheinternationalsample,onlytheDanishgroupbelievedthatpsychologicaletiologywasnotthestrongestcausalcomponent,nordidtheybelievestutteringislearned.Bycontrast,alltheotherlaygroupsratedpsychologicaletiologythestrongest.Thisresearchshowedthatpeo-pleacrossculturesperceivestutteringalmostasnegativelyasmentalill-nessandobesity.
Changing Public Attitudes toward Stuttering
Craig28wrotethatifthosewhostuttercould,byamoreeducatedpublic,facepositiveorevenneutralpublicreactionsintheirsocialenvironment,theimpactoftheirstutteringwouldbelessdebilitating.Thiswouldim-provethestutterers’qualityoflife.Ofcourse,increasedaccuratepublicawarenesswouldonlybesuccessfuliftheenvironment,whenprovidedwithsucheducation,wasmoreunderstandingandempathicandbehavedlessdiscriminately.
26 V.Pachigar, J.Stansfield, J.Goldbart:“Beliefsandattitudesofprima-ryschoolteachersinMumbai,Indiatowardschildrenwhostutter.”International Journal of Disability, Development and Education,2011,vol.58,pp.287–302.
27 K.O. St. Louis: “Aglobalprojecttomeasurepublicattitudesaboutstut-tering.”The ASHA Leader,2005.
28 A. Craig: “Theassociationbetweenqualityoflifeandstuttering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2010,vol.35,pp.159–160.
Comparisonofattitudestowardsstuttering… 269
Severalstudieshavebeenreportedthathaveattemptedtoprovidein-formationandimprovestutteringattitudes.McGee,KalinowskiandStu-art29reportedthatparticipantsdisplayedanevenmorenegativeattitudetowardsstutteringafterwatchingavideopresentationaboutthedisorder,suggestingthatthemessageshownappearedtoreinforcepre-existingstereotypestowardsthedisorder.Snyder30showedthatafact-orientedclinicalvideoofseverestutteringwasmoreeffectiveinchangingatti-tudesthanaprofessionallymadevideothatfocusedontheemotionsofstuttering.ApreliminarystudybyFlynnandSt.Louis31showedthatafterapresentationaboutstutteringbyoneoftheresearchers,whohimselfstut-tered,participantsshowedanimprovementintheirattitudesonmostoftheitemsonthePOSHA-Sscale.Afollow-upstudybyFlynnandSt.Louis32alsoshowedthatstudents’attitudestowardsstutteringwereimprovedbyapresentationaboutstuttering.Itdemonstratedthatanoralpresenta-tionbyanactualstuttererwasmoreeffectivethanavideo.Theauthorsdiscussedpreviousstudiesinthisareautilizingclassroompresentations,personalexperienceswithPWS,andvideosorfilms,pointingoutthateachoftheseinterventionshasitsadvantagesanddisadvantages.Theycon-cludedthatpresentationsbypeoplewhostutteraremorelikelytogenerateanintenseandpersonalimpact,buttheyaredifficulttoreplicate.Videos,ontheotherhand,thougheasiertoreplicate,lackthepotentialimpactofaninteractionwithastutterer.
Purposes
Thepresentstudyaddressesthefollowingexperimentalquestions:– Towhatextentdodifferencesinattitudestowardsstutteringexistbe-
tweenPolishandEnglishuniversitystudents?– TowhatextentdoesattendingacourseonstutteringaffectPolishstu-
dents’attitudestowardstutteringcomparedtoashorttextonstutteringorADHDinbothPolishandEnglishstudents?
29 L. McGee, J. Kalinowski, A. Stuart: “Effectofavideotapedocumen-taryonhighschoolstudents’perceptionsofahighschoolmalewhostutterers.”Journal of Speech–Language Pathology and Audiology,1996,vol.20,pp.240–246.
30 G.J. Snyder: “Exploratory research in the measurement and modifica-tion of attitudes toward stuttering.” Journal of Fluency Disorders, 2001, vol. 26,pp.149–160.
31 T.W. Flynn, K.O. St. Louis: An investigation of adolescent opinions on stut-tering.PosterpresentedatAnnualConventionoftheAmericanSpeech–Langua-ge–HearingAssociation,Boston,MA,2007.
32 T.W. Flynn, K.O. St. Louis: “Changingadolescentattitudestowardstut-tering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2011,vol.36,pp.110–121.
MartaWęsierska,KennethO.St.Louis270
– TowhatextentarePolishandEnglishstudents’attitudestowardstut-teringaffectedbytheirgender?
– TowhatextentarePolishandEnglishstudents’attitudestowardstut-teringaffectedbytheirself-ratedknowledgeofstuttering?
Method
Questionnaire and Stimuli
ThequestionnaireusedtomeasurestutteringattitudeswasthePOSHA-S.33Itasksdemographicquestionsabouttheindividual’sage,yearsofeduca-tion,gender,race,religion,perceivedincome,andlanguagesspoken.Italsoasksrespondentstoratetheimportanceofcertainaspectsofhealth,abilities,andlifepriorities,suchasfreedom,safety,andfreewill.Ageneralsectionasksfortherespondent’sopinionsonstutteringincomparisonwithotherattributesrangingfrompositive(intelligence)toneutral(left-handedness)tostigmatized(obesity,mentalillness).ThefinaldetailedsectionofPOSHA-S,focusesonstuttering,asksquestionsaboutthere-spondent’sknowledgeofthedisorder,attitudestowardsit,andthoughts,emotions,andbehaviourstheywouldhaveduringaninteractionwithapersonwhostutters(seeAppendices1and2).Thequestionnairewasfivepagesinlength.Itconsistedofclosedquestionswhereinparticipantswereaskedtochoosetheanswertheythoughtmostappropriatelydescribedtheirbeliefs.Inthegeneralsection,responseswereratedonascaleof1to5andinthestutteringsection,“yes,”“no,”or“notsure.”ThePolishtranslationwasusedbypermissionofthepublisher.
Thestudyalsoutilizedprintedtextsonstutteringandattention-deficit/hyperactivitydisorder(ADHD).ThestutteringtextwastakenonlinefromtheStutteringFoundationofAmericawebsiteandtheADHDtextfromthe ADDitudeMag website. The two texts were around 250 words inlengthandweresimilarinformat.Bothdebunkedfivemythsinvolvingnegativeperceptionsofthedisorderandendedupshowingeachdisorderinapositivelight.
33 K.O. St. Louis: “The Public Opinion Survey of Human Attributes-Stut-tering(POSHA-S)…”
Comparisonofattitudestowardsstuttering… 271
Participants
Thestudysamplesincluded272studentvolunteersfromtheUniversityofSilesiainPolandandtheUniversityofWarwickinEngland.Participantswereapproachedinthelibrary,undergraduatecommonroom,outsidelec-turehallsandseminarrooms.InEnglandthedatawascollectedbyMartaWęsierska.InPoland,however,theresearcherwasaidedbyfourindividu-alsfromtheUniversityofSilesia.Theassistantsweretrainedtodeliverthequestionnairesinexactlythesamemanneraswasusedbytheauthor.
Experimental Procedures
Aftersigningconsentforms,participantswereaskedtofilloutaquestion-naireaboutattitudestowardstuttering.Iftheyagreed,theywerethenaskedtoreadtheinstructionsonthefrontpageofthequestionnaire.Next,someparticipants(seebelow)wereaskedtoreadashorttextabouteitherstutteringorADHD.Next,theywereaskedtofilloutthequestionnaire,whichrequiredabout10minutes.Allstudentsweredebriefedaftercom-pletingthequestionnaire.
Theparticipantsconsistedofsevensamplegroups,threeintheUKandfourinPoland.ThePolishgroupswereasfollows:acontrolgroup(63stu-dents),agroupwithpreviousknowledgeaboutstuttering(50students),anADHDtextgroup(25students),andastutteringtextgroup(34students).TheEnglishsampleconsistedofthreegroups:controlgroup(50students),ADHDtextgroup(20students),andstutteringtextgroup(30students).ThePolishgroupwithpreviousknowledgewerestudentswhotookamod-uleinstutteringandspeechdisordersaspartoftheirdegree,butthesestudentswerenotintrainingtobecomespeechandlanguagetherapists.Theothergroupsconsistedmostlyofpsychologystudentsandstudentsofotherhumanisticsubjectssuchaspedagogyandlanguagestudies.Thesewereanopportunitysampleofparticipantswhoweremostaccessibletotheresearchers.
Data Analysis
QuestionnairedatawereenteredintoseparateMicrosoftExcelspread-sheetsforeachofthegroups.Thequestionmarkanswersweregiventhevalue‘0’whichindicatedaneutralresponseandyes/noanswerswerecon-vertedinto1and-1dependingonwhethertheresponsewaspositive(withrespecttoattitudeorknowledge)ornegative.Theseresponseswerethenaddedupforeachparticipant.
MartaWęsierska,KennethO.St.Louis272
Participantsscoredinatotalofsixareas.Attitudetowardsstutteringconsistedofscoresfor:“Peoplewhostuttershould…”withquestionsaboutjobs,life,choicesandpersonaltraits;worryifvariouspeoplestuttered,reactionsandfeelingswhiletalkingtoastutterer,andsourcesofhelpforstuttering.Accuracyofstutteringknowledgewasbasedontheirresponsestoitemsrelatingtothecauseofstuttering.
Aratingofgeneticinheritancewasregardedastheonlycorrectre-sponseinthelistofpotentialcauses.Thustheyreceivedthehighestac-curacyscoresiftheychose“yes”forgeneticinheritanceand“no”fortheotherchoices.Knowingapersonwithastutteringdisorderwasdeter-minedaspartofaquestionaskingwhethertheparticipantknewpeoplewhostuttered(alongwiththefourotherattributes).Ratingofaperson’sownspeakingabilitywastakenfromthedemographicsectionwhereinrespondentsratedtheirspeakingandlearningabilityalongwiththeirphysicalandmentalhealth.Generaltolerancewasdeterminedbyrat-ingsinthegeneralsectiononoverallimpression.Thequestionaboutleft-handednesswasleftoutasitwastheonlyneutralattribute.Perceivedamountofknowledgeofstutteringcamefromthequestion“TheamountIknowaboutpeoplewhohaveastutteringdisorder”answeredonascaleof1to5.
One-wayANOVAswererunforeachofthesixvariables(attitudes,accuracy,familiarityorknowingsomeonewhostutters,self-perceivedspeakingability,generaltolerance,andknowledge)withthesevensam-plegroups.TheFisher’sLSDwascarriedoutforallpairwisecontrastonsignificantANOVAs.
Results
One-wayANOVAsrevealedasignificantdifferencebetweenthegroupsontheattitudescore(F(6,256)=3.41,p<.05),accuracyofknowledgescore(F(6,256)=5.10,p<.05),generaltolerance(F(6,256)=5.35,p<.05)andperceivedknowledge(F(6,256)=15.38,p<.05).Therewasnosignificantdifferencebetweenthesevenconditionsonrespondents’ownspeechrat-ing(F(6,256)=1.69,p>.05).Theonlysignificantdifferencefoundbetweenmaleandfemalerespondentswasongeneraltolerance(femalesscoredhigher)(F(1,269)=9.60,p<.05).
Interestingly,noneoftherespondentsinanyofthegroupsreportedhavingastutteringdisorder.Mostpeopledidknowsomeonewhostut-tered.Whenknowingapersonwhostutters,therewasasignificantdif-ferenceinattitudescore(higherifyes)(F(1,270)=11.42,p<.05),accuracyofknowledge(lowerifyes)(F(1,270)=4.75,p<.05),generaltolerance(higherifyes)(F(1,270)=6.04,p<.05)andperceivedknowledge(higher
Comparisonofattitudestowardsstuttering… 273
ifyes)(F(1,270)=25.24,p<.05).APearsonproduct-momentcorrelationcoefficientwascalculatedbetweenperceivedknowledgeandaccuracyofknowledgebutwasnon-significant(R(272)=−.08,p>.05).
Table 1
Meanratingsforthesixvariablescreatedfromtheitemsforthepurposeofthisstudy,fromthesevensamplesofuniversitystudentsandF-valuesfromone-wayANOVAsconductedforeachvariable
Variablesanalysedinthepresentstudy
Poland UK
F-va
lue
foro
ne-w
ay
AN
OVA
Spee
chTh
erap
ym
odul
e
Stutt
erin
g
info
rmat
ion
ADH
Din
form
atio
n
Cont
rol
Stutt
erin
g
info
rmat
ion
ADH
D
info
rmat
ion
Cont
rol
Attitudetowardsstuttering 10.52 9.74 8.24 7.59 11.57 11.75 8.80 3.41
Accuracyofknowledge 2.20 2.74 1.56 1.59 3.57 2.70 2.82 5.10
Knowingapersonwhostutters(%) 64.00 61.76 68.00 55.56 46.67 55.00 56.00 .077
Ratingofownspeakingability 4.36 4.00 4.44 4.03 4.03 4.20 4.34 1.69
Generaltolerance 1.60 0.97 1.36 0.70 −0.40 0.25 0.12 5.35Perceivedamountofknowledgeofstuttering
3.56 2.56 2.68 2.52 1.97 1.85 1.92 15.38
Table 2
Meanscoresonthefivequestionsforparticipantswhodidordidnotknowsomeonewhostutters
Typeofparticipants
Attitudescore
Accuracyofknowledge
Perceivedspeakingability
Generaltolerance
Perceivedknowledge
Participantswhoknowsomeonewhostutters
8.1 2.6 4.01 0.4 2.1
Participantswhodidnotknowanyonewhostutters
10.4 2.1 4.30 0.9 2.8
Fortheattitudemeasure,theresultswereasfollows:thegroupofPolishstudentswithpreviousknowledgeofstutteringscoredsignificantlyhigh-erthanthePolishcontrolgroup.Furthermore,theEnglishcontrolgroupscoredhigherthanthePolishcontrolgroup.ThesestudentsalsoscoredlowerthanthePolishgroupwithpreviousknowledge,howeverthisresultwasnotsignificantstatistically.EnglishstudentswhoreadboththeADHDandthestutteringtextbeforecompletingthequestionnairescoredhigherthanboththePolishandEnglishcontrolgroups.TherewasnosignificantdifferencebetweenPolishandEnglishstudentswhoreadthetextabout
MartaWęsierska,KennethO.St.Louis274
stuttering.ButthisdifferencecouldbeobservedintheADHDtextcondi-tion,wheretheEnglishstudentsperformedbetter.Overallinthismeasure,thePolishcontrolgroupshadthelowestscoresandtheEnglishstutteringgroupscoredthehighest.
Relativetoaccuracyofknowledge,theEnglishcontrolgroupstudentsscoredsignificantlyhigherthanPolishcontrols.Therewasalsoasignifi-cantdifferencebetweenthePolishcontrolgroupandthegroupwhoseparticipantsweregivenatextaboutstuttering;thelattergroupscoredhigher.ThiswasnotthecaseforthePolishADHDgroupcomparedtothePolishcontrolgroup.Therewas,however,asignificantdifferencebetweenPolishADHDandPolishstutteringgroups,withthelatterscoringhigher.ThelowestscoreswereobtainedbythePolishcontrolandADHDgroup.ThePolishstutteringgroupscoredthehighest.
Onthegeneraltolerancemeasure,theEnglishstutteringconditionob-tainedthelowestscoresandthePolishgroupwithpreviousknowledgescoredthehighest.Furthermore,thePolishgroupwithpreviousknow-ledgescoredhigherthanthePolishcontrols,andsodidtheEnglishstut-teringgroup.TheEnglishcontrolgroupscoredlowerthanthePolishgroupwithpreviousknowledge.TherewasasignificantdifferencebetweentheADHDandstutteringgroupsinbothcountrieswithPolishstudentsscor-inghigherinboth.
Perceivedknowledgewasalsoassessedfordifferencesbetweengroups.Firstly,thePolishgroupwithpreviousknowledgeofstutteringscoredhigherthanthePolishcontrolaswellastheEnglishcontrol.ThePolishcontrolgroupalsoscoredsignificantlyhigherthantheEnglishcontrol.ThePolishgroupwithpreviousknowledgescoredhigherthanboththePolishADHDandstutteringgroups.ThePolishADHDgroupscoredhigherthantheEnglishADHDgroup.Also,thePolishstutteringgroupscoredhigherthantheEnglishone.
Discussion
Relativetothefirstpurpose,thisstudyrevealedseveralsignificantdif-ferencesbetweenPolishandEnglishstudentsonallmeasures.Polishstudentsbelievedthattheyhadmoretoleranceandhavemoreknowledgeaboutstuttering.Englishstudents,however,showedamorepositiveat-titudetowardsstuttering,andtheirknowledgeofthisdisorderwasmoreaccurate.
Havingpreviousknowledgeofstuttering,oratleastattendingacourseon the subject, was also an asset. These students who attended suchacourseobtainedthehighestscoresonthegeneraltolerancemeasure.ThesestudentsalsoscoredhigherthanthePolishcontrolsontheother
Comparisonofattitudestowardsstuttering… 275
measures.Thereweresomeinterestingfindings inthestutteringandADHDgroups.Apartfromtheaccuracyofknowledge,thestutteringgroupdidnotperformsignificantlybetterthanthecontrolgroup(thiswasforthePolishsample).Thereweresignificantdifferencesbetweenthestut-teringandADHDgroupsaswellasbetweenPolishandEnglishADHDandstutteringgroups.
Therefore,thefollowingcanbeconcluded:takingacourseinstutteringimprovesattitudestowardsstutteringaswellasaperceivedknowledgeofthedisorderandtoleranceingeneral.Whatismore,Englishstudentsdisplaymorepositiveattitudestowardsstutteringandhaveamoreac-curateknowledgeaboutitthanPolishstudents,buttheyscoreloweronperceivedknowledgeanddisplayaworsegeneraltolerance.Readingatextaboutstutteringimprovesoverallattitudestowardsthedisorderaswellasaccuracyofknowledge(inthesetwovariablesthehighestscoreswereobtainedbythestudentswhoreadsuchatext).Polishstudentsattributetothemselvesthehighestlevelsofknowledgeaboutstuttering.Malesandfe-malesdonotdifferintheirattitudestowardsstuttering.Knowingsomeonewhostuttersisconnectedwithhigherscoresonattitude,generaltoleranceandperceivedknowledge.
TheresultsobtainedinthisstudywereconsistentwithresearchdonebySt.Louis34whofoundnosignificantdifferencesbetweenmalesver-susfemalesfrom50differentsamplesintheirattitudestowardsstutter-ing.AlthoughnotprovidingapreversuspostPOSHA-Scomparison,ourfindingssupportthepossibilitythatattitudestowardsstutteringcanbeimproved.35
Thereareafewlimitationsinthestudydescribedabove.Tostartwith,thereisanissuewiththesamplesizeinthisresearch.Althoughitislargeoverall,theamountofparticipantsineachseparatesubgroupisquitesmall(forexample,therewereabout20participantsintheADHDknowl-edgegroup).Suchsmallsamplesizeisdifficulttodrawvalidconclusionsfrom.Ifsuchastudyisreplicatedinthefutureitwillbeadvisabletoin-troducealargersamplesize.
Anotherissuewasthefactthatitwasfemale-dominated–therewereveryfewmalerespondentsineachsubgroup.Thisislikelytobeduetothecoursesattendedbymostoftherespondentswhoagreedtotakepart(Psy-chologyandPedagogyaregenerallyfemale-dominatedcoursesofstudy).Becauseofthisitcouldbearguedthattheconclusionsaboutgenderdif-ferencesinthisresearcharenotvalid.But,ontheotherhand,St.Louis
34 K.O.St. Louis:“Maleversusfemaleattitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of Communication Disorders,2012,vol.45,pp.246–253.
35 T.W. Flynn, K.O. St. Louis: “Changingadolescentattitudestowardstut-tering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2011,vol.36,pp.110–121.
MartaWęsierska,KennethO.St.Louis276
arrivedatsimilarconclusions,sothismaynotnecessarilybeasignificantissue.36Thisfactoraboutthegenderofthemajorityoftherespondentsdoes,however,influencethegeneralizabilityoftheresults.
ThethreegroupsintheEnglishsampledidnotactuallyconsistsolelyofBritishstudents.Someoftheparticipantswhotookpartwereinternation-alstudents.Thesestudentscamefromallcontinentsandfromcountrieswithdifferentculturesandbeliefsystems.ItcannotthereforebesaidthattheresearchcomparedEnglishandPolishstudentswithoutitbeingneces-sarytodeletealargeportionofthedata,whichinturnwouldbeagreatdisadvantagetothepresentstudy.Animprovementnecessarytoconsiderinfutureresearchwouldbetomakesurethatonlynativestudentsareconsideredinsuchcross-culturalcomparisons.
POSHA-Sasksclosedquestions(theparticipantseithergive“yes”or“no”answersorrateonascalefrom1–5or−2to+2).Theissuewiththissortofquestionsisthattheyleavenoroomforelaboratingontheresponse–thereisnowaytounderstandwhytherespondentschosecertainanswersorhowtheyreallyfelt.
Future directions
Preventionisthemosteffectivewayofdealingwithstuttering.Researchastheonedescribedaboveshowsthatthereisstillalotofworktobedoneineducatingthepublicaboutstuttering,itscauses,warningsigns,riskfactorsandtreatments.Alothasalreadybeendone,especiallyinthe United Kingdom and the United States where support groupsand organizations providing help and services to people who stutteraremucheasiertoreach.Bycontrast,inPolandtheprofessionalsinthechild’severydayenvironmentareunawareofwhatstuttering is,andtherefore,arelesslikelytodirectthechildtoaspeechtherapist.Thisinturnmeansthathis/herproblemworsensandismuchmoredifficulttoovercomewhenthechildfinallyattendstherapy.PublicationswhichhavebeenwidelyavailableintheStatesviatheStutteringFoundationofAmericaincludethoseentitled“Thechildwhostutters:tothepaediatri-cian”and“Stuttering:straighttalkforteachers”haveonlyrecentlybeentranslatedintoPolish.Educationalposterswerealsocreatedandplacedinkindergartens,schools,clinicsandprivatepracticeswithhelpfulguide-linesforparentsandteachersofchildrenwhostutter.Theseeffortsshouldbecontinued.
36 K.O. St. Louis: “The Public Opinion Survey of Human Attributes-Stut-tering(POSHA-S)…”
Comparisonofattitudestowardsstuttering… 277
Acknowledgements
The POSHA-S was used with the permission of Kenneth O. St. Louis.ThePolishtranslationwascarriedoutbyAnetaPrzepiórkaandAgataBłachnio.
TheauthorswouldalsoliketothankProfessorIwonaLoewe,ProfessorDanutaPluta-Wojciechowska,KatarzynaWęsierska,PhDandAgnieszkaStasiczek,MAfromtheUniversityofSilesiafortheirhelpwithdatacol-lectioninthePolishsampleandProfessorElizabethWonnacottfromtheUniversityofWarwickwhosupervisedtheproject.
ThisresearchwaspresentedattheInternationalCounsellingandEduca-tionConferenceinIstanbul,Turkey,May2–5,2013.
References
AbdallaF.A.,St. LouisK.O.: “Arabschoolteachers’knowledge,beliefsandreactionsregardingstuttering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2012,vol.37,pp.54–69.
BetzI.R.,BloodG.W.,BloodI.M.:“Universitystudents’perceptionsofpre-schoolandkindergartenchildrenwhostutter.”Journal of Commu-nication Disorders,2007,vol.41,pp.259–273.
BloodsteinO.:“Onpluttering,skiveringandfloggering:acommentary.”Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders,1990,vol.55,pp.392–393.
Burley P.M., Rinaldi W.: “Effectsofsexoflistenerandofstuttereronratingsofstutteringspeakers.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1986,vol.17,pp.329–333.
CraigA.:“Theassociationbetweenqualityoflifeandstuttering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2010,vol.35,pp.159–160.
CraigA., TranY., Craig M.: “Stereotypestowardsstutteringforthosewhohaveneverhaddirectcontactwithpeoplewhostutter:Arand-omizedandstratifiedstudy.”Perceptual and Motor Skills,2003,vol.97,pp.235–245.
Crowe T.A., Cooper E.B.: “Parentalattitudestowardandknowledgeofstuttering.”Journal of Communication Disorders,1977,vol.10,pp.343–357.
CroweT.A.,WaltonJ.H.:“Teacherattitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1981,vol.6,pp.163–174.
FlynnT.W.,St. LouisK.O.:“Changingadolescentattitudestowardstut-tering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2011,vol.36,pp.110–121.
FlynnT.W.,St. LouisK.O.:An investigation of adolescent opinions on stut-tering.PosterpresentedatAnnualConventionoftheAmericanSpeech–Language–HearingAssociation,Boston,MA,2007.
MartaWęsierska,KennethO.St.Louis278
Guitar B.: Stuttering:An integrated approach to its nature and treatment.Baltimore:LippincottWilliams&Wilkins,2006.
Hughes S.: Exploring attitudes toward people who stutter: A mixed model approach.Unpublisheddissertation.BowlingGreen,OH:BowlingGreenStateUniversity,2008.
HughesS.etal.:“Universitystudents’explanationsfortheirdescriptionsofpeoplewhostutter:Anexploratorymixedmodelstudy.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2010,vol.35,pp.280–298.
HurstM.A.,CooperE.B.:“Employerattitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1983,vol.8,pp.1–12.
Ip M.L. etal.:“StutteringattitudesinHongKongandadjacentMain-landChina.”Journal of Speech-LanguagePathology,2012,vol.14,pp.543–556.
McGee L., Kalinowski J., Stuart A.: “Effectofavideotapedocumen-taryonhighschoolstudents’perceptionsofahighschoolmalewhostutterers.”Journal of Speech–Language Pathology and Audiology,1996,vol.20,pp. 240–246.
OzdemirR.S.,St. LouisK.O.,TopbasS.: “StutteringattitudesamongTurkishfamilygenerationsandneighborsfromrepresentativesam-ples.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2011,vol.36,pp.318–333.
Pachigar V., Stansf ield J., Goldbart J.: “Beliefsandattitudesofpri-maryschoolteachers inMumbai, Indiatowardschildrenwhostut-ter.”International Journal of Disability, Development and Education,2011,vol.58,pp.287–302.
Pa t t e r s o n J., P r i n g T.: “Listener attitudes to stuttering speakers:Noevidenceforagenderdifference.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1991,vol.16,pp.201–205.
Snyder G.J.: “Exploratoryresearchinthemeasurementandmodifica-tionofattitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2001,vol.26,pp.149–160.
St. Louis K.O.: “Aglobalprojecttomeasurepublicattitudesaboutstut-tering.”The ASHA Leader,2005.
St. LouisK.O.:“Maleversusfemaleattitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of Communication Disorders, 2012, vol.45,pp.246–253.
St. Louis K.O.: “ThePublicOpinionSurveyofHumanAttributes-Stut-tering(POSHA-S):Summaryframeworkandempiricalcomparisons.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2011,vol.36,pp.256–261.
St. Louis K.O.: “Researchanddevelopmentforapublicattitudeinstru-mentforstuttering.”Journal of Communication Disorders,2012,vol.45,pp.129–146.
St. LouisK.O.,LassN.J.:“Asurveyofcommunicativedisordersstudents’attitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1981,vol.6,pp. 49–80.
Comparisonofattitudestowardsstuttering… 279
St. Louis K.O., Roberts P.M.: “Measuringattitudestowardstuttering:English-to-FrenchtranslationsinCanadaandCameroon.”Journal of Communication Disorders,2010,vol.43,pp.361–377.
St. LouisK.O.etal.:“Developmentofaprototypequestionnairetosurveypublicattitudestowardstuttering:Constructvalidity.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2009,vol.34,pp.11–28.
S t. L o u i s K .O. et al.: “Development of a prototype questionnaire tosurvey public attitudes toward stuttering: Principles and methodo-logies in the first prototype.” The Internet Journal of Epidemiology,vol.5(2),2008.
St. Louis K.O. etal.:“Developmentofaprototypequestionnairetosur-veypublicattitudestowardstuttering:Reliabilityofthesecondproto-type.”Contemporary Issues in Communication Sciences and Disorders,2009,vol.36,pp.101–107.
WardD.:Stuttering and Cluttering. Frameworks for understanding and treat-ment.Hove:PsychologyPress,2006.
Weisel A., Spektor G.: “Apossibleexplanationofthe‘stutterer’stere-otype.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1998,vol.23,pp.157–172.
MartaWęsierska,KennethO.St.Louis280
Appendix1
MeanvaluesandratingsofthedemographiccharacteristicsofsevensamplesofuniversitystudentsandthemediansamplemeanvaluefromthePOSHA-Sdatabase(anitemusedasavariableinthisstudyisshowninthefootnotetothetable)
Demographiccharacteristics
Poland UK
POSH
A-S
Data
base
m
edia
n*
Spee
chTh
erap
y
mod
ule
Stutt
erin
g
info
rmat
ion
ADH
D
info
rmat
ion
Cont
rol
Stutt
erin
g
info
rmat
ion
ADH
D
info
rmat
ion
Cont
rol
AgeGender(male:female)Education(years)Income(familyandfriends)(scaleof1–5)Income(country)(scaleof1–5)Working(%)
23.800.0916.983.05
2.9714
20.140.2112.913.33
3.033
21.980.7913.403.05
2.9520
20.020.1913.593.25
3.065
21.320.4513.733.19
3.330
21.170.3812.502.95
3.330
20.940.2213.003.15
3.396
35.740.5314.663.15
3.0062
Self-identification(%)MultilingualIntelligentLeft-handedObeseMentallyillStuttering
86348400
100449300
924440120
1005910500
405010370
204025500
384862122
39407710
HealthandabilitiesPhysicalhealthMentalhealthAbilitytolearnAbilitytospeak**
46455468
48553656
52565872
47434162
32435252
35506058
40416368
45576062
LifeprioritiesBesafe/secureBefreeSpendtimealoneAttendsocialeventsImaginenewthingsHelplessfortunateHaveexcitingexperiencesPracticemyreligionEarnmoneyDojob/dutyGetthingsdoneSolvebigproblems
907232193647–193357717781
79712835503813–1758567477
788324506452–8466749088
83782635472913–1168516669
726328231228–20–4142506047
70632882418–25–6015505863
767444352832–10–5044446653
806432153352–182558747469
* Medianof195separatesamplemeansfromthePOSHA-Sdatabasecontaining8,874respondents(circaSeptember,2013).
**Unconvertedratingsusedinthevariable,“Ratingofownspeakingability”usedinthisstudy.
Comparisonofattitudestowardsstuttering… 281
Appendix2
MeanratingsforPOSHA-Sitems,components,subscores,andOverallStutteringScores(−100to+100)forthemeanratingsofsevensamplesofuniversitystudentsandthemediansamplemeanvaluefromthePOSHA-Sdatabase(itemsusedasvariablesinthisstudyareshownbyfootnotes)
Variablesanalysedinthepresentstudy
Poland UK
POSH
A-S
data
base
med
iana
Spee
chTh
erap
ym
odul
e
Stutt
erin
gin
form
atio
n
ADH
Din
form
atio
n
Cont
rol
Stutt
erin
gin
form
atio
n
ADH
Din
form
atio
n
Cont
rol
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Belie
fsa
bout
per
sons
who
stutt
er
Traits/personality havethemselvestoblame*b nervousorexcitable*b shyorfearful*b
3510048−44
419771–44
239620–48
23 8432–47
711005757
45953010
309614–20
18846–8
Stutteringshouldbehelpedby… speechandlanguagetherapistb otherpeoplewhostutterb medicaldoctor*b
3710073–61
191009–53
98838–100
179432–73
4210033–7
4810050–5
3510033–27
198910–26
Stutteringiscausedby… geneticinheritancec learningorhabits*c averyfrighteningevent*c anactofGod*c avirusordisease*c ghosts,demons,spirits*c
39 1025–54 856798
462444–38856297
262032–64672480
27 1714–51732186
58301047909083
4620020906085
4644–10810035100
341515–4654987
Potential canmakefriendsb canleadnormallivesb candoanyjobtheywantb shouldhavejobsrequiringgood judgmentb
711001005034
5894941529
681001003636
60971001925
6793874047
66100805530
671001003533
6293854937
Total 45 41 31 32 60 51 45 34
Self
reac
tions
top
eopl
ew
host
utter
Accommodating/helping trytoactlikethepersonwas talkingnormallyb personlikeme fillintheperson’swords*b tellthepersonto“slowdown” or“relax”*b makejokeaboutstuttering*b shouldtrytohidetheirstuttering*b
7490
69926
9496
45100
–4153–3
8874
3192
–4220–40
8868
3476
–1637–27
7659
5377
–404070
10073
4380
–302535
8070
5696
–355155
9078
4778
–224721
8870
MartaWęsierska,KennethO.St.Louis282
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Se
lfre
actio
nsto
peo
ple
who
stutt
erSocialdistance/sympathy feelcomfortableorrelaxedb feelpity*b feelimpatient(notwanttowait whilethepersonstutters)*b concernaboutmydoctor*b concernaboutmyneighbour*b concernaboutmybrotherorsister*b concernaboutme*b impressionofpersonwhostutterse wanttohavestuttering
1741871
61900–59 21–58
1503559
5397–9–479–66
1–40–824
5610012–726–70
–3 –27 1727
1194–19–697–78
1570–1050
5010047–43–10–68
29354060
859055–10–5–58
1855039
659039–26–5–69
4212059
3969–26–502–70
Knowledge/experience amountknownaboutstutteringf stutterersknownd personalexperience(me,myfamily, friends)
–2828–91–20
–30–14–8912
–31–16–8912
–41–13–92–17
–56–52–84–33
–56–53–80–35
–56–50–90–29
–36–23–86–3
Knowledgesource television,radio,films magazines,newspapers,books internet school doctors,nurses,otherspecialists
3410454277–4
214767112–32
–1228–1236–42–68
20 52214310–24
–1143–233–20–57
–11550–10–20–80
–1845–29–16–24–65
–16–5–10–33–18–32
Total 24 12 –3 3 0 1 0 0
Obe
sity
/men
tali
llnes
ssu
bsco
re
Overallimpression obesee mentallyille
–4–13–21
–11–6–15
–11–8–14
–14 –8–25
–31–13–10
–210–5
–26–11–5
–15–23–9
Want/have obese mentallyill
–79–78–80
–87–87–88
–84–88–80
–92 –92 –91
–88–92 –85
–90–95–85
–89–97–82
–84–83–85
Amountknownabout obese mentallyill
117–15
–86–22
07–6
–411–18
11–325
–6–130
21437
01011
Total –27 –35 –32 –37 –36 –39 –32 –34OverallStutteringScore 35 27 14 17 30 26 22 16
*Indicatesthatratingsarereversedsomorepositive,accurate,ordesirableratingsarehigher
a Medianof195separatesamplemeansfromthePOSHA-Sdatabasecontaining8,874respondents(circaSeptember,2013).
bUnconvertedratingsusedinthevariable“Attitudes”usedinthisstudy.
cUnconvertedratingsusedinthevariable“Accuracyofknowledge”usedinthisstudy.
dUnconvertedandunweightedratingsusedinthevariable“Knowingapersonwhostutters”usedinthisstudy.
eUnconvertedratingsusedinthevariable“Generaltolerance”usedinthisstudy.
fUnconvertedratingsusedinthevariable“Perceivedamountofknowledgeofstuttering”usedinthisstudy.
Comparisonofattitudestowardsstuttering… 283
Marta Węsierska, Kenneth O. St. Louis
Porównanie postaw polskich i angielskich studentów wobec jąkania się
Streszczenie:Badaniapokazują,żeuogółuspołeczeństwa–czytowrzeczywi-stości,czytylkohipotetycznie–utrzymujesiępiętnującapostawawobecosób,któresięjąkają.Wewcześniejszychbadaniachokreślano,jakiesąpostawywobecjąkaniawśródróżnychgruprespondentów:studentów,rodzicówczylogopedów.Niniejszyartykułopisujebadania,któremiałynaceluustalenieróżnicpomiędzypostawamiwobecjąkaniawśródstudentówwPolsceiWielkiejBrytanii.
Wszyscy uczestnicy zostali poproszeni o jednorazowe wypełnienie kwestio-nariusza POSHA-S (Public Opinion Survey of Human Attributes-Stuttering).Kwestionariuszbadałsześćobszarówzwiązanychzpostawamiorazwiedządo-tyczącązaburzenia, jakimjest jąkanie:postawywobec jąkania,poziomwiedzyojąkaniu,znajomośćzosobą(bądźosobami)jąkającąsię,własnaocenaumiejęt-nościwypowiadaniasię,opiniauczestnikanatematogólnegospołecznegopozio-mutolerancjiwobecjąkaniaorazpoziomuwiedzyotymzaburzeniu.
Wyniki otrzymane w polskiej grupie badawczej wskazują, że udział w zaję-ciach związanych tematycznie z jąkaniem prowadzi do poprawy nastawieniawobec jąkania, jak i zwiększenia wiedzy o tym zaburzeniu oraz podniesieniaogólnegopoziomutolerancji.Wynikiporównawczeobugrup–polskiejibrytyj-skiej–wskazały,żeangielscystudencimanifestująbardziejpozytywnepostawywobecjąkaniaorazposiadająwiększąwiedzęnatemattegozaburzenia.Zkoleipolscy studenci wyżej oceniali swoją znajomość zaburzenia oraz otrzymywaliwyższewynikiwzakresieogólnejtolerancji.Wobukrajachprzeczytanieteks-tunatematjąkaniaprzedwypełnieniemkwestionariuszapozytywniewpłynęłonapostawywobeczaburzenia.Znajomośćzosobąjąkającąsięokazałasięwspół-zależnazwyższymiwynikamiwzakresiepostaw,ogólnejtolerancjiorazocenywłasnejwiedzyo jąkaniu.Zpowyższychwynikówbadaczewywnioskowali,żepostawywobecjąkaniamogąbyćzmienioneprzezkontaktzosobąjąkającąsię–zarównoosobisty,jakizapośrednictwemnagraniawideo.Badaniewykazałopo-trzebędalszej,bardziejdogłębnejanalizypostawwobecróżnychludzkichcech,takichjakjąkanie.Upowszechnianiewynikówbadańwzakresiepostawwobecjąkaniajestważnymelementemwprocesiepodnoszeniaświadomościnatemattegozaburzeniawspołeczeństwie.
Słowa kluczowe:postawywobecjąkaniasię,kwestionariusz,POSHA-S,studen-ci,Polska,Anglia
Marta Węsierska, Kenneth O. St. Louis
Der Vergleich von der Einstellung der polnischen und englischen Studenten zum Stottern
Zusammenfassung: Wie die Forschungen zeigen, werden stotternde PersonenimmernochinWirklichkeitodernurhypothetischvomGroßteilderGesellschaftanprangert.InfrüherenForschungenwurdeuntersucht,welcheEinstellungzumStotternverschiedeneGruppenderBefragten:Studenten,ElternoderLogopäden
MartaWęsierska,KennethO.St.Louis284
hatten.DervorliegendeArtikelschildertdieunterdenStudenteninPolenundGroßbritanniendurchgeführtenForschungen,diebezweckten,dieUnterschiedeinderEinstellungzumStotternzwischenpolnischenundenglischenStudentenfestzustellen.AlleBefragtenwurdengebeten,einmaldenPOSHA-S(PublicOpi-nionSurveyofHumanAttributes-Stuttering)Fragebogenauszufüllen.MitdemFragebogen wurden sechs mit dem Stottern und der Einstellung dazu verbun-denenGebieteuntersucht:EinstellungzumStottern,KenntnisseüberStottern,Bekanntschaftmiteiner(odermehreren)stotterndenPersonen,eigeneBeurtei-lungderAussagefähigkeit,dieMeinungenderBefragtenüberdenallgemeinenStanddergesellschaftlichenToleranzdemStotterngegenüberundheutigesWis-sensstandüberdieseStörung.
DieinderpolnischenForschungsgruppeerreichtenErgebnisseweisendaraufhin,dassdieTeilnahmeandenvomStotternhandelndenLehrveranstaltungeneine bessere Einstellung zum Stottern, bessere Kenntnisse über diese Störungund letztendlich mehr Toleranz zu Folge hatte. Die Ergebnisse des VergleichsvondenbeidenGruppenderpolnischenundderenglischen–zeigten,dasseng-lischeStudentensichdurchpositivereEinstellungzumStotternunddurchbes-sereKenntnisseüberdasProblemauszeichneten.PolnischeStudentendagegenbeurteilten ihre Kenntnisse über Stottern höher und waren mehr tolerant. Ei-nengutenEinflussaufpositivereEinstellungzuderStörunghattedieLektüredesvomStotternhandelndenTextesnochvordemAusfüllendesFragebogens.Die Bekanntschaft mit einem Stotternden wirkte sich positiv auf die Einstel-lung, allgemeine Toleranz und die Beurteilung von eigenen Kenntnissen überStottern aus. Die Forschungsergebnisse erlaubten den Wissenschaftlern zumSchlusskommen,dasseinpersönlicheroderVideo-KontaktmitstotternderPer-sonimStandesind,dieEinstellungzumStotternzuändern.SiebetonenauchdieNotwendigkeiteinertieferenAnalysevonderEinstellungzuverschiedenenmenschlichenUnvollkommenheiten,wiez.B.:Stottern.DieVerbreitungvonIn-formationenüberdieEinstellungzumStotternwirdbestimmtzurErweiterungderKenntnisseüberdieseStörunginderGesellschaftbeitragen.
Schlüsselwörter: Einstellung zum Stottern, Fragebogen, POSHA-S, Studenten,Polen,England