RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TEMPERAMENT AND DYSFLUENCIES UNDER DELAYED AUDITORY FEEDBACK IN FLUENT SPEAKERS. Eden Treadway, B.S., Tyler McMurtry, B.S., MBA, Brittany Zarse, B.A., Bernelda Thomas, B.S., Elizabeth Yeager, B.A., & Vijaya K. Guntupalli, Ph.D.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TEMPERAMENT AND DYSFLUENCIES UNDER DELAYED AUDITORY FEEDBACK IN FLUENT SPEAKERS
Eden Treadway, B.S., Tyler McMurtry, B.S., MBA, Brittany Zarse, B.A., Bernelda Thomas, B.S., Elizabeth Yeager, B.A., & Vijaya K. Guntupalli, Ph.D.
Department of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN
This study systematically examined the relationship between individual susceptibility to delayed auditory feedback (DAF) and temperamental profiles of fluent adult speakers. DAF has shown to not only increases fluency in individuals who stutter, but also creates disfluencies in fluent speakers. However, there is considerable variability in individual response to DAF, and factors responsible for this variability are not clearly understood. Twenty-four typically fluent participants (8 males, 16 females) performed both a conversational and reading task under 0ms, 100ms, 200ms, and 400ms of DAF. Using videotaped samples, stutter-like disfluencies (e.g. prolongations, mono-syllabic word repetitions, and silent blocks) were then measured for each participant. Each participant also completed the Adult Temperamental Questionnaire (ATQ) (Derryberry & Rothbart, 1988; Rothbart, Ahadi, & Evans, 2000). Of four temperament dimensions measured by the ATQ, Negative Affect exhibited a significant negative correlation with the number of stuttering-like disfluencies produced at 200 ms delay. Specifically, a subscale of Negative Affect, Discomfort, showed a significant negative correlation. The ability to predict a fluent speaker's performance on tasks under DAF based on temperament profile may eventually provide insight to the prediction of treatment effects of DAF in people who stutter.
Future ResearchIt should be noted that these results are preliminary and should be viewed as the basis for further research concerning the relationship between temperament and SLDs caused by DAF in fluent adults. Future research should further explore the contributing factors for variability in individual susceptibility to DAF.
IntroductionDelayed auditory feedback (DAF) is a well-known method to increase fluency in individuals who stutter. However, it has also been shown to induce disfluencies in some normally fluent speakers (Lee, 1950). Normal speakers tend to produce more disfluencies at a longer delay time (i.e. 200 ms) under DAF (Stuart et al., 2002). Evidence has also shown that the normal speaking population generally shows greater variability in reaction to DAF (Timmons, 1982). Temperament is one of many possible factors influencing individual variability in response to DAF. Temperament refers to individual differences in a person’s tendency to behave, think, and feel in certain consistent manners under various circumstances (Chase, Sutton, First, & Zubin, 1961). Previous research has linked emotionally reactive and sensitive temperaments to disfluent speech (Anderson, Pellowski, Mark, Conture, & Kelly, 2003). However, no research to date has examined the relationship between individual temperament profiles in fluent adults and response to DAF. Understanding this relationship may result in better understanding of disfluency for both clinical treatment and research evidence. The purpose of the present study is to examine the relationship between temperament profile and response under DAF in normally fluent adult speakers.
ReferencesAnderson, J.D., Pellowski, M.W., Conture, E.G., Kelly, E. M. (2003). Temperamental characteristics of young children who stutter. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46,1211-1233.Chase, R.A., Sutton, S., First, D., & Zubin, J. (1961). A developmental study of changes in behavior under delayed auditory feedback. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 99,101-112. Corey, D.M., & Cuddapah, V.A. (2008). Delayed auditory feedback effects during reading and conversation tasks: Gender differences in fluent adults. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 33, 291-305. Derryberry, D. & Rothbart, M.K. (1988). Arousal, affect, and attention as components of temperament. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 958-966.Lee, B.S. (1950). Effects of delayed speech feedback. Journal of Acoustic Society of America, 22, 824-826. Rothbart, M.K. Ahadi, S.A. & Evans D.E. (2000). Temperament and personality: Origins and outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 122-135.Stuart, A., Kalinowski, J., Rastatter, M.P., Lynch, K. (2002). Effect of delayed auditory feedback on normal speakers at two speech rates. Journal of Acoustical Society of America, 111(5), 2237-2241.Timmons, B.A. (1982). Physiological factors related to delayed auditory feedback and stuttering: A review. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 55, 1179-1189.