Comparing evaluations of social situations for adults who do and do not stutter

被引:0
|
作者
Brundage, Shelley B. [1 ]
Winters, Katherine L. [1 ,2 ,5 ]
Armendariz, Karla [1 ]
Sabat, Ruchi [1 ,3 ]
Beilby, Janet M. [4 ]
机构
[1] George Washington Univ, Dept Speech Language & Hearing Sci, 2115G St NW,Suite 226, Washington, DC 20052 USA
[2] Univ Texas Austin, Dept Speech Language & Hearing Sci, 2405A Whitis Ave,Stop A1100, Austin, TX 78712 USA
[3] KIPP NorCal Publ Sch, 1000 Broadway 460, Oakland, CA 94607 USA
[4] Curtin Univ, Curtin Sch Allied Hlth, Kent St, Perth, WA 6102, Australia
[5] Univ Texas Austin, Arthur M Blank Ctr Stuttering Educ & Res, Austin, TX 78712 USA
关键词
Adults; Stuttering; Interpretation bias; Cognitive bias; Social situations; ANXIETY DISORDER; INTERPRETATION BIAS; JUDGMENTAL BIASES; RESOLVING AMBIGUITY; NEGATIVE EVALUATION; COGNITIVE-PROCESSES; ATTENTIONAL BIAS; AVOIDANCE; SPEAKING; PHOBIA;
D O I
10.1016/j.jcomdis.2021.106161
中图分类号
R36 [病理学]; R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100104 ; 100213 ;
摘要
Purpose: Numerous research studies indicate that stuttering is associated with increased risk for social anxiety disorder (SAD). Interpretation bias is one of four cognitive biases thought to maintain symptoms associated with SAD. Interpretation bias occurs when one evaluates social situations as more negative than they actually are. The purpose of this study was to investigate if adults who do and do not stutter interpret positive, ambiguous, mildly negative, and profoundly negative social situations similarly, or-if like individuals with SAD-adults who stutter exhibit negative interpretation biases. Method: Forty-eight adults who stutter and 42 age-and gender-matched adults who do not stutter participated. Participants completed the Fear of Negative Evaluation (FNE) and were assigned to one of four groups: adults who stutter with high FNE (AWS-High), adults who stutter with low FNE (AWS-Low), adults who do not stutter with high FNE (AWNS-High), and adults who do not stutter with low FNE (AWNS-Low). All participants completed the trait scale of the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and the Interpretation and Judgmental Questionnaire (IJQ). The IJQ contains descriptions of four types of social situations: positive, mildly negative, profoundly negative, and ambiguous. Within each situation type there are five different scenarios, for a total of 20 scenarios across the four situation types. Participants provided written responses to these 20 social scenarios. Qualitative analyses were used to understand how members of each group interpreted the different social scenarios. Results: Thematic analysis revealed that each group responded in similar ways to each of the social scenarios, regardless of the type of situation. Adults who do and do not stutter with low and high FNE agreed on many themes related to the 20 social scenarios, and they agreed across all four types of social situations. Somewhat surprisingly, the theme "stuttering" was mentioned infrequently by the adults who stutter. Conclusions: Results suggested that adults who do and do not stutter with low and high FNE interpret social situations similarly, and that no group demonstrated a negative interpretation bias consistent with what is observed in adults with SAD. The interpretations provided by each group were appropriate to the specific scenarios being evaluated.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Origin and Pawn scaling for adults who do and do not stutter: A preliminary comparison
    Lee, Kyungjae
    Manning, Walter H.
    Herder, Carl
    JOURNAL OF FLUENCY DISORDERS, 2015, 45 : 73 - 81
  • [22] Communication attitude of Kannada-speaking adults who do and do not stutter
    Veerabhadrappa, Rakesh Chowkalli
    Krishnakumar, Jyotsna
    Vanryckeghem, Martine
    Maruthy, Santosh
    JOURNAL OF FLUENCY DISORDERS, 2021, 70
  • [23] Differences in implicit motor learning between adults who do and do not stutter
    Hobler, Fiona
    Bitan, Tali
    Tremblay, Luc
    De Nil, Luc
    NEUROPSYCHOLOGIA, 2022, 174
  • [24] The Impact of Social-Cognitive Stress on Speech Variability, Determinism, and Stability in Adults Who Do and Do Not Stutter
    Jackson, Eric S.
    Tiede, Mark
    Beal, Deryk
    Whalen, D. H.
    JOURNAL OF SPEECH LANGUAGE AND HEARING RESEARCH, 2016, 59 (06): : 1295 - 1314
  • [25] F2 TRANSITION MEASUREMENT IN BULGARIAN ADULTS WHO STUTTER AND WHO DO NOT STUTTER
    Padareva-Ilieva, Gergana
    Georgieva, Dobrinka
    CHUZHDOEZIKOVO OBUCHENIE-FOREIGN LANGUAGE TEACHING, 2018, 45 (03): : 243 - 251
  • [26] Uniqueness Point Effects during Speech Planning in Adults Who Do and Do Not Stutter
    Coalson, Geoffrey A.
    Byrd, Courtney T.
    Kuylen, Amanda
    FOLIA PHONIATRICA ET LOGOPAEDICA, 2017, 69 (5-6) : 191 - 208
  • [27] Examining resting state functional connectivity and frequency power analysis in adults who stutter compared to adults who do not stutter
    Valaei, Atefeh
    Bamdad, Sobhan
    Golfam, Arsalan
    Golmohammadi, Golnoosh
    Ameri, Hayat
    Raoufy, Mohammad Reza
    FRONTIERS IN HUMAN NEUROSCIENCE, 2024, 18
  • [28] Speech-Induced Suppression for Delayed Auditory Feedback in Adults Who Do and Do Not Stutter
    Toyomura, Akira
    Miyashiro, Daiki
    Kuriki, Shinya
    Sowman, Paul F.
    FRONTIERS IN HUMAN NEUROSCIENCE, 2020, 14
  • [29] Delayed verbal reactions in people who do and who do not stutter
    Peters, HFM
    van Lieshout, PHHM
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY, 1998, 30 (1-2) : 16 - 16
  • [30] Speech Situation Checklist-Revised: Investigation With Adults Who Do Not Stutter and Treatment-Seeking Adults Who Stutter
    Vanryckeghem, Martine
    Matthews, Michael
    Xu, Peixin
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY, 2017, 26 (04) : 1129 - 1140