theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / kunnampallil gejo john
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
1/82
Theoretical perspective of
stuttering
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJOJOHN ,MASLP
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
2/82
What are theories??
Theories-- putting together the bits and
pieces of what is known about something
to understand it better.
A theory puts together findings in a
systematic way,
past phenomenon-- explainedfuture-- is predicted.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
3/82
A complete theory explains why
one person stutters on some words and not
others
In some situations and not others
*When a theory explains these things well, it can
lead to effective treatment
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
4/82
Scientists --theory a formal set ofhypotheses -- explains the important causal
relationships in a phenomenon.
These hypotheses are then tested, and the
theory may be thrown out, improved or
confirmed as a result.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
5/82
The field of stuttering research and treatmenthasnt developed far enough to have a formaltheory of stuttering
There are a number of informal theories thatmight be called as theoretical perspectives ortheoretical models.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
6/82
Bloodstein (1973)groups theories as
belonging to 3 types Theories of the etiology of stutteringwhich
offer an account of the etiology, or onset ofstuttering.
e.g., Johnsons diagnosogenic theory (1942).Orton-Travis theory (1927; 1931).
Theories of the moment of stuttering, whichare concerned with the nature of discrete
instances of stuttering behaviors.e.g., Wests (1958), Eisensons (1958) andGlaubers (1958) concepts.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
7/82
Theories that shifts the frame ofreference,whose basic contribution lies in aa reformulation of a [previous theory, either of
the etiology or of the moment of stuttering, interms of a new frame of reference.
E.g., cybernetic models of stuttering (Mysak,
1960; Lee 1951) & learning theoryinterpretations (Wischner, 1950; Brutten &
Shoemaker, 1967; & others).
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
8/82
5 main Perspectives of stuttering
Stuttering as anticipatory struggle behavior.
Stuttering as a learned behavior.
Stuttering as a prosodic behavior.
Stuttering as timing and sequencing disorder.
Stuttering as a temporal disorder.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
9/82
I. Stuttering as an anticipatory
struggle behavior:
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
10/82
The anticipatory struggle hypothesis:-
These hypotheses view the moment of stuttering
as learned behavior that is some how precipitated
by it being anticipated and feared.
They indicate that what maintains the disorder is
anticipating stuttering and struggling to avoid it.
Some of those who advocate such hypothesesrefer to the moment of stuttering as struggle
behavior.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
11/82
Theoretically, if a person who had the disorderstopped fearing and desiring to avoid stuttering,he/she would become more fluent, evennormally fluent.
If such a person could be made to want tostutter, he or she would be even more likely toexperience increased fluency.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
12/82
Many stutters knowledgeable about stutteringagree that anticipation of stuttering contributes to
both precipitating moments of stuttering and
maintaining the disorder
There is no general agreement on the nature of
the mechanism by which this occur.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
13/82
Stutteres interfere in some manner with the waythey are talking because of their belief in the
difficulty of speech.
This idea, termed -- the anticipatory struggle
hypothesis, -- in one or another of its forms, one
of the most widely employed explanations of the
moment of stuttering and has a strong influence
on theory, treatment and research.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
14/82
Early formulations:
The early literature on speech disorderscontains numerous references to stuttering as
stammering from fear, doubt, or anticipation
of speech difficulty.
Boome & Richardson (1931) and Gifford
(1940) inferred that stuttering as an
expectancy neurosis.
Others referred to it as an anxiety neurosis, or
speech phobia.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
15/82
Failure of automaticity:
A distinctive hypotheses --that stuttering resulted
from the attempt to exercise conscious control
over the automatic processes of speech.
West in more refined form stated that stutterers
tend to create difficulty for themselves by
voluntarily producing individual speech
movements rather than by initiating
automatic serial responses.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
16/82
Anticipatory avoidance:
The anticipatory struggle concept is best knownin the special form in which Johnson developedit in a series of writings spanning three decades.
In accordance with this view, the very thingsstutterers do in order not to stutter are theirstuttering.
Stuttering is then, anticipatory, apprehensive,
hypertonic avoidance reaction.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
17/82
That is --it is what happens when a personanticipates stuttering and becomes tense in theattempt to avoid it.
In a phrase stuttering is what the speaker doeswhile trying not to stutter again.
stuttering is not a symptom of a constitutionalabnormality or an emotional disorder, but a
consequence of certain inappropriateperceptual and evaluative reactionswithregard to speechthat a speaker has learnedfrom the social environment.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
18/82
Approach - avoidance conflict:
Stuttering may be-- the resultant of a conflictbetween opposing wishes to speak and to keepsilent.
This view was developed extensively by Sheehan(1953; 1958) in a learning theory context to beconsidered further on.
From a practical standpoint the conflict hypothesis -
-stuttering results from the desire to avoid speech.
In contrast to Johnsons view of stuttering as theavoidance of stuttering, then the conflict theorydepicts it is as the avoidance of speaking.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
19/82
Preparatory set:
Van riper (1937; 1954) developed his concept ofthe role of the preparatory set in stutteringprimarily as a therapeutic tool and has notappeared to place much emphasis on its
theoretical implications.
Van riper--, in advance of the attempt on a wordperceived as difficult or feared, stutterers tend toplace themselves in a characteristic muscular
and psychological set which determines theform of the subsequent stuttering block.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
Thi t h ti ll
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
20/82
This set has essentially
3 identifiable features.
1. Stutteres establish an abnormal focus oftension in their speech organs.
2. They prepare themselves to say the first
sound of the difficult word as a fixedarticulatory posture rather than as a normalmovement blending with the rest of the word.
3. They may adopt this unnatural posture of thespeech organs appreciably before initiatingvoice or airflow, resulting in a silentpreformation of the sound
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
21/82
Having done all of these things
because of their anticipation of
difficulty on the word, it is apparent
that they have effectivelydestroyed their chances of saying
it normally.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
22/82
Tension and fragmentation:
practically all of the integral features of stuttering
behavior are reducible to the surface effects of
two underlying forms of behaviortension &
fragmentation.
In stuttering the underlying tension produces
prolongations and hard attacks.
The repetition of stuttering may be interpreted as
a fragmentation of rehearsing the initial part of
their throw.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
23/82
Such an interpretation is useful in
explaining why it is almost always
the first sound of the word that the
stutterer repeats, as well as certainother puzzling features of its
distribution in the speech sequence.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
24/82
Anticipatorystruggle theories:
The moment of stuttering in which -- stutteresinterfere with the way they speak because of theirbelief in the difficulty of speech and theiranticipation of speech failure.
The explanations to account for this and differ inthe respect that they consider the causative factorof central importance to be
1. The childs excessive hesitations and repetitions(primarily stuttering)
2. The parents high standards of fluency(diagnosogenic theory)
3. Communicative failure or pressures, broadlyviewed
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
25/82
People who stutter are frequently
viewed as more anxious than non
stutterers and as being depressed.
A strong and pervasive stereotype is
held by non stutterers that people
who stutter are guarded, nervous,
and tense.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
26/82
The Relationship Between Communication
Attitude, Anxiety, and Depression in
Stutterers and Non stutterers
Susan Miller,Ben C.Watson;
Journal of Speech and Hearing Research
Vol.35 789-798 August 1992)
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
27/82
This study examined self-perceptions ofgeneral state and trait anxiety, depression, andcommunication attitude in matched groups ofstutterers and non stutterers.
Results refute the assertion that people whostutter are more anxious or depressed thanthose who do not.
Anxiety and depression are not related to self-ratings of stuttering severity.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
28/82
Communication attitude is negative for this groupof people who stutter and becomes increasinglynegative as self-ratings of stuttering become
more severe.
People who stutter, grouped by severity rating,differed in the strength of the relation betweenmeasures of communication attitude, anxiety, and
depression.
Findings suggest that the anxiety of people whostutter is restricted to their attitude towardscommunication situations and that it is a rational
response to negative communicationexperiences.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
29/82
Theories of anticipatory
struggle hypothesis
1. Theory of primary and secondary
stuttering
2. Diagnosogenic theory
3. Theory of communication pressure
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
30/82
1.Theory of primary and
secondary stuttering:
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
31/82
stuttering as a developed disorder arises as a
reaction to unusual but relatively simplerepetitions in a childs speech, termed primarystuttering.
According to Froeschels and Bluemel, stuttering
first appears in the form of speech repetitionsthat occur without effort or awareness on thepart of the child.
This stage of the disorder was held to be
essentially a phenomenon of early childhoodand one which tends to disappear is speakingdifferently.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
32/82
Many primary stutteres are urged to thinkbefore they speak, to take a deep breath or to
stop and start over so often that they becomeguilty and apprehensive about their mild speechinterruptions.
The more serious form of disorder was then
believed to develop from the childs efforts toavoid primary stuttering.
This advanced form, marked by strenuous
blockages, fear, embarrassment, and variousconcomitant symptoms of effort and emotion,was characterized as secondary stuttering.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
33/82
According to this theory of the development ofstuttering , is only some time after its onset, insecondary stage, that it becomes an anticipatory
struggle behavior as children begin to react withanticipation, fear and avoidance to their primarystuttering
Primary stuttering is type of disintegration orbreakdown, and both genetic and environmentalfactors were suggested as its chief cause.
Van riper stated that in some instances the etiology
was primarily constitutional, in others neurotic, and instill others from a home environment marked byfrequent interruption, unresponsive listeners, demandsto confess guilt orally, or other fluency disruptors.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
34/82
The theory of Weiss (1964) regarding therelationship between stuttering and cluttering, in
view of Weisss identification of cluttering withprimary stuttering.
Cluttering,is a disorder of fluency marked by
monotonous, rapid, jerky, repetitive, indistinctutterance with frequent telescoping of words,unaccompanied by fear, anticipation, any senseof difficulty with specific words or sounds or evena detailed awareness of speaking abnormally.
It has long been noted that stuttering andcluttering frequently appear in the same person.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
35/82
Weiss in 1934 advanced the hypothesis thatstuttering essentially always has its onset as areaction of effort or struggle for the purpose ofovercoming cluttering.
Later in 1964 he employed a broader definitionof cluttering than is usual, reflected that thedifference between cluttering and Blumelsprimary stuttering was largely one of
nomenclature
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
36/82
2.Diagnosogenic theory
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
37/82
According to this theory the disorder is usually
caused by a parents diagnosis of normaldysfluencies in childs speech as stuttering.
Bluemel, Froschels and others Developed
stuttering, reaction relatively simple repetitionsin young stutterers.
Froschels, noted the similarity of these
repetitions to those of many normal childrenduring the early years of speech development
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
38/82
According to Johnsons theory, it was notexcessive hesitancy that usually caused a child to
develop anticipatory reactions of struggle or
avoidance, but abnormal parental reactions to
this hesitancy.
Others had termed primary stuttering was not a
disorder to be treated. It was a normal attribute of
speech that was to be prevented from giving riseto stuttering by alerting the parents evaluation of
it.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
39/82
Johnson (1934) found that majority of the
descriptions offered were confined to
-- brief, effortless repetitions of syllables, words,
and phrases of which the child was unaware,
He inferred that these descriptions were similar
to speech hesitations of most ordinary children
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
40/82
Johnsons findings, may stand as a formal
statement of his theory:
Practically every case of stuttering was
originally diagnosed as such, not by a speech
expert, but by a layman- usually one, or both of
the childs parents.
What these laymen had diagnosed as stuttering
was, by and large indistinguishable from the
hesitations and repetitions known to be
characteristic of normal speech of young
children. Stuttering as a definite disorder was found to
occur, not before being diagnosed, but after
being diagnosed (Johnson, 1944).
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
41/82
According to Johnson, stuttering
generally began not in the
childs mouth but in the
parents ear.
This was not, however, because the
parents were necessarily as
aberrant in their perceptions of
reality as this might seem to imply.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
42/82
Evidence show that most young children arerelatively disfluent and that parents of stutterersoften tend to be dominating, overanxious, or
perfectionisic.
But Johnson's basic premise that on the date oforiginal diagnosis, stuttering children may speakin a manner that is not always to be clearlydifferentiated from that of other children of likeage who have not been diagnosed as stutteresis difficult to verify by means of an objectivescientific test.
Attempts to confirm it, based upon intensiveinterviewing of parents in case of recent onset ofthe problem.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
43/82
3.Theory of
communication pressure
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
44/82
If stuttering is based upon the childs beliefin the difficulty of speech, there would
appear on the surface that there might not
be other sources from which stuttering
might stem.
scattered references in the literature on
stuttering for this kind to the problem of
the onset of stuttering was made by
Bloodstein (1958; 1975) on the basis of a
clinical study of 108 stuttering children.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
45/82
It usually begins as a response of tension and
fragmentation in speech, not sharply different
from certain types of normal disfluency, and is
brought about largely by the provocation pf
continued or severe communicative failure in thepresence of communicative pressure.
This hypothesis finds its most significant
elaboration with reference to the variety offactors that may contribute to a childs conviction
that speech demands unusual effort or
precautions.KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
46/82
This theory can be summarized by thestatement that stuttering is caused by
communicative failure as perceived by the child.
From certain stand point it may be seen as a
generalization of the two anticipatory struggle
theories which are described previously.
It differs from them, however, in denying that
either a diagnosis of stuttering or the occurrence
of excessive repetitions in a childs speech isnecessary in order for anticipatory struggle
reactions to develop.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
47/82
Stuttering as an learned
behavior
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
48/82
According to this point of view, stuttering has its
origin in the early fumbling and hesitancies and
interruptions which seem to be a natural and
common phase of the speech learning process.
Rather he/she does a form of maladaptive
behavior that is somehow learned.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
49/82
These learning theories have lent themselves to
a number of systematic statements about
stuttering.
In general, the aim of such statements has been
to make use of the relatively precise language of
behavior science in order to try to define the
process by which stuttering is learned and
maintained by identifying the motivationalfactors, stimulus variables and reinforcing
conditions
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
50/82
1.Stuttering as an
instrumental avoidance act
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
51/82
proposed by Wischner (1947; 1952).
Wishner based his formulations on twoobservations that had been the subject of
considerable earlier research.
One of these was the adaptation effect and theother phenomenon of expectancy or anticipation,
which he equated with anxiety.
Drawing an analogy between the tendency forstuttering to decrease with successive readings
of the same passage (adaptation) and
experimental extinction of a learned response.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
52/82
One of the best documented facts aboutstuttering is that, as a group, individuals who
stutter show a decrease in stuttering frequency
of approximately 50% across five repeated
readings of the same material- a phenomenon
known as the adaptation effect
(Johnson; Brown; Curtis; Edney & Keaster, 1967;
Johnson & Knott, 1937; Van riper & Hull, 1955).
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
53/82
Frank & Bloodstein (1971) reported thatstuttering frequency during a solo readingfollowing 5 unison readings was not significantly
different from that during the last reading of a
conventional adaptation procedure with six solo
readings.
Their finding, that the relatively fluent unison
readings and the more disfluent solo readings
resulted in similar reductions of stuttering
frequency, demonstrated that overt stuttering is
not later required for adaptation to occur.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
54/82
The proposed motor learning hypothesis ofstuttering adaptation maintains that reductions instuttering frequency during repeated oralreadings can be attributed to improvements inspeech motor skill resulting from repeatedpractice of the same sequences of articulatory
and phonatory movements.
The increase in the speed of performance duringmotor learning is an interesting phenomenonthat may prove useful as a first test of Max et
als (1997) motor learning hypothesis ofstuttering adaptation.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
55/82
This reasoning is based on the fact that the
increase in speed of performance duringimprovements in non speech motor behaviorrepresents change in the opposite direction ofthe changes that are known to be associatedwith many conditions of reduced stuttering.
Increase in fluency as a result of various typesof stuttering treatment also have been reportedto be associated with a decrease in speech orarticulation rate (Story; Alfonso; & Harris, 1996)or an increase in the duration of acoustically orkinematically defined segments (Mallard & Westbook, 1985; Mc clean, Kroll & Lofrus, 1990).
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
56/82
Adaptation Of Stuttering Frequency
During repeated Readings: Associated
Changes In Acoustic Parameters OfPerceptually Fluent Speech
Authors:Ludo max & Anthony J Caruso
JSLHR; Vol:41; Dec98
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
Study was conducted 8 individuals who stutter
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
57/82
Study was conducted 8 individuals who stutter
It revealed that speech adjustments occurringduring adaptation differ from those reported forother fluency enhancing conditions or stutteringtreatment.
During the last 6 repeated readings, a statisticallysignificant increase in articulation rate wasobserved, together with a decrease in wordduration, vowel duration, & consonant- vowel (CV)transition extent.
Other adjustments showing relatively consistenttrends across individual subjects includeddecreased CV transition rate & duration, &increased variability of both CV transition extentand vowel duration.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
58/82
One of the central problems in the application of
learning principles to stuttering is to explain the
nature of the reinforcement that causes it to
persist in the face of repeated punishment.
Wischner posited that this reinforcement
consisted of a reduction in the stutterers anxiety
following the block.
Prior to the moment of stuttering there was a
building up of expectancy, or fear.KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
59/82
The immediate effect of stuttering was a
reduction of this tension.
Although the block had punishing
consequences, Wischner pointed out that these
did not follow as immediately on the termination
of the block as did anxiety reduction.
Consequently, the stuttering behavior was
reinforced rather that extinguished
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
60/82
Wischners main analysis clearly consisted inpart of a reformulation of Johnsons concept ofthe moment of stuttering as an anxiety motivatedavoidance reaction.
He referred to Johnsons diagnosogenic theoryas tenable instigators to anxiety in the stutterermight be found in parental disapproval of normaldisfluency
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
61/82
2.stuttering as approach
avoidance conflict
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
62/82
Sheehan (1953; 1958) viewed stuttering
primarily as the resultant of a conflict between
opposing drives to speak and to hold back from
speaking and developed an interpretation of the
moment of stuttering based on Neal E millersresearch and theoretical formulations on
approachavoidance conflict in animals.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
63/82
Miller (1944) showed that as a hungry ratapproaches a food trough at the end of a runwayits motivation to reach the food steadilyincreases.
It is possible to measure the strength of itsapproach drive and to show by means of asloping line precisely it increases with nearnessto the goal.
If electric shock is substituted for the food the ratflees. The farther it gets from the feared object,the weaker becomes its motivation to avoid it
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
64/82
This declining avoidance drive may also berepresented by a sloping line, or gradient.
If electric shock & food are combined, together
with the appropriate cuestimuli by which therat may recognize their presence, the element ofconflict is introduced.
In such a situation the approach and avoidancedrive are present together, and it is possible torepresent this by showing both gradientssuperimposed on the same field.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
65/82
The gradient of avoidance is steeper than thegradient of approach.
As a result, if the opposing drives are of about
the same average strength, at a certain distancefrom the goal the two gradients will intersect.
This fact has some rather significantimplications. Before the point of intersectionreached, the approach gradient is higher thanthe avoidance gradient, and the rat could beexpected to run toward the goal.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
66/82
He stated that stuttering was basically anapproachavoidance conflict.
Whenever stutterers urge to speak was
distinctly stronger than their desire to avoidspeech, they spoke fluently.
When avoidance of speaking was the clearlydominant drive, they were silent. But when theirapproach and avoidance drives were in relativeequilibrium, so that the gradients crossed, theystuttered
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
67/82
Sheehan offered the hypothesis that once theblocking had begun to take place the fear thathad elicited it became reduced, the avoidancedrive was consequently decreased, and so theconflict was temporarily resolved.
He theorized further that the stutterersconflicting feelings of approach and avoidancetoward speech tended to be complicated by
similar attitudes toward silence, and he pointedout that this, too, had its counterpart in thelaboratory which Miller termed double approach
avoidance conflict.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
Sheehan postulated 5 distinct levels on which
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
68/82
Sheehan postulated 5 distinct levels on whichspeech avoidance drives might operate. Hestated that these drives might emanate from
Reaction to specific words, resulting principallyfrom past conditioning to phonetic factors.
Reaction to threatening speech situations.
Guilt & anxiety concerning the emotional content
of speech. Feelings of anxiety in the stutterers relationships
with listeners, especially when these are seen asauthority figures, and
The egodefensive need to avoid competitiveendeavors posing threat of failure or threat ofsuccess.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
69/82
This clearly suggests that
stuttering may have its origin
both in the learning of speech
anxietiesand in unconsciousfactors of personality.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
70/82
Perkins (1953) pointed out that the logicalimplication of the conflict hypothesis was that thestuttering block itself was not learned behavior.
Both Sheehan (1951) and perkins (1953)attempted to determine the effect on stuttering ofnon reinforcement, which they defined by aprocedure in which the subjects repeated eachstuttered word until they could say it normally,
and obtained somewhat conflicting results.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
71/82
3. Stuttering as
operant behavior
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
72/82
Flanagan, Goldiamond & Azrin [1958 ]concluded that they had been able to reduce the
stuttering of three laboratory subjects.
These reports suggesting that stuttering andnormal disfluency could be brought under
operant control did much to arouse interest in
investigating these behaviors by applying the
conditioning principles of B.F skinner.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
I Ski t f b h i l l i
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
73/82
In Skinners system of behavioral analysis, acentral role is played by the kind of response,termed an operant that is capable of being
increased or decreased through itsconsequences as they affect the organism.
Given behavior consists essentially of aspecification of the contingent consequencesserving to reinforce and maintain it as aresponse to certain occasioning stimuli.
This reinforcement is described as positive
when it consists of such a stimulus as a pellet offood or as negative when it consists of anaversive stimulus such as shock.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
74/82
They hypothesized that when a childs nonfluent responses are punished the child may
respond by changing the form of nonfluency to
struggle or silence.
This changes reinforced by the termination of
the aversive stimuli of nonfluency (negative
reinforcement), but may occasion new
punishment are also occasioned by the fact thatstutteres tend to become their own listeners.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
75/82
There are certain positive reinforcements forstuttering.
The child may gain attention or may use
stuttering as an excuse for failure or inadequacy.
This reinforcement is likely to be particularlystrong because of the variable schedule onwhich it is usually given, responses intermittentlyreinforced being particularly resistant toextinction.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
76/82
Various other workers have made of the operantmodel in connection with stuttering.
For the most part, however, they have been less
concerned with etiological theories than withexperimental demonstrations of the operantnature of stuttering and disfluency.
The result has been a considerable amount ofresearch on punishment in relation to stuttering.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
77/82
4. stuttering as conditioned
disintegration
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
78/82
Brutten & shoemaker (1967) theorized thatstuttering in its integral aspects is a failure ordisruption of fluency resulting from emotionalarousal that has become associated with speechand speech related stimuli through a process of
classical conditioning.
From this point of view the stuttering blocks notoperant, but respondent, behavior.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
79/82
Most investigators of the learning processrecognize at least a rough distinction between 2kinds of learning, one based on operant orinstrumental conditioning and the other onrespondent or classical conditioning.
Classical conditioning is represented by the wellknown pavlovian experiment.
Classical conditioning plays a important part inthe learning of anxiety reactions or othermotivational states of automatic arousal.
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
Cl i l diti i f th t tt i f th
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
80/82
Classical conditioning for the stuttering from thepoint of view of Brutten & Shoemaker.
They based their theory on the observation thatin normal speakers stress may produceautomatic reactions capable of disruptingspeech fluency.
They suggested that a further, or advanced,stage of stuttering comes into being throughpenalties the child receives for abnormal speechbehavior.
As a result of such punishment, the act ofspeaking itself, or the words employed, come toelicit conditioned negative emotion, & in time theconditioned stimuli for fluency failure may for thisreason consist increasingly of speech
associated cuesKUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
81/82
Other writers find it very difficult to accept theview that the initial fluency breaks are operantly
conditioned.
The very consistency of the core behaviorsstutteringthe syllabic repetitions and fixationsor prolongations that are found in all stutteresand that in young children seem to constitutemost of the abnormality seem to indicate thatthese are precipitated rather than learned.
Accordingly, Brutten & Shoemaker & others haveheld that this core behavior occurs as a result ofemotionally induced breakdown in coordination
KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
,BASLP, MASLP
-
7/27/2019 Theoretical perspective of stuttering.pdf / KUNNAMPALLIL GEJO JOHN
82/82