Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Judgment of Disfluency in People who Stutter and People who do not Stutter

Results from Magnitude Estimation

Bibliographic Data

ID9743756
AuthorsRobin J Lickley (Queen Margaret University College, Edinburgh, U.K.,, corresponding author), Robert J Hartsuiker (0000-0002-3680-6765, Ghent University), Martin Corley (0000-0001-7011-428X, University of Edinburgh), Melanie Russell (Queen Margaret University College, Edinburgh, U.K.), Ruth Nelson (0000-0002-9474-2114, Queen Margaret University College, Edinburgh, U.K.)
Year2005
Volume48
Issue3
Pages299-312
Publication date2005-09-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueLanguage and Speech (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0023-8309 • E-ISSN: 1756-6053
PublisherSAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/00238309050480030301
PMID16416939
OpenAlexW1537634861
LanguageEN
References cited27

Two experiments used a magnitude estimation paradigm to test whether perception of disfluency is a function of whether the speaker and the listener stutter or do not stutter. Utterances produced by people who stutter were judged as “less fluent,” and, critically, this held for apparently fluent utterances as well as for utterances identified as containing disfluency. Additionally, people who stutter tended to perceive utterances as less fluent, independent of who produced these utterances. We argue that these findings are consistent with a view that articulatory differences between the speech of people who stutter and people who do not stutter lead to perceptually relevant vocal differences. We suggest that these differences are detected by the speech self-monitoring system (which uses speech perception) resulting in covert repairs. Our account therefore shares characteristics with the Covert Repair (Postma & Kolk, 1993) and Vicious Circle (Vasić & Wijnen, 2005) hypotheses. It differs from the Covert Repair hypothesis in that it no longer assumes an additional deficit at the phonological planning level. It differs from the Vicious Circle hypothesis in that it no longer attributes hypervigilant monitoring to unknown, external factors. Rather, the self-monitor becomes hypervigilant because the speaker is aware that his/her speech is habitually deviant, even when it is not, strictly speaking, disfluent

Cognitive psychology · Covert · Developmental psychology · Linguistics · Perception · Speech perception · Speech recognition · Stuttering · Computer Science · Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism · Phonetics and Phonology Research · Psychology · Stuttering Research and Treatment

  • Speaking

    Willem J M Levelt•Speaking•1989

  • Monitoring and self-repair in speech

    Open Access•Willem J M Levelt, W Levelt•Cognition•1983

  • A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production.

    Gary S Dell•Psychological Review•1986

  • On The Relation among Speech Errors, Disfluencies, and Self-Repairs

    Open Access•Albert Postma, Herman Kolk et al.•Language and Speech•1990

  • The Hcrc Map Task Corpus

    Open Access•Anne H Anderson, Miles Bader et al.•Language and Speech•1991

  • Magnitude Estimation of Linguistic Acceptability

    Ellen Gurman Bard, D H Robertson et al.•Language•1996

Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae