A longitudinal study of articulation, language, rate, and fluency of 22 preschool children who stutter
Introduction
This is a longitudinal study of the speech and language proficiency of preschool-age children who stutter originally studied by Ryan (1992). Longitudinal studies offer a unique perspective on the development of stuttering Andrews & Harris, 1964, Johannsen, 1997, Johannsen & Schulze, 1995, Månsson, 2000, Ryan, 1984, Ryan, 1990, Ryan, 1998, Yairi, 1981, Yairi, 1982, Yairi, 1990, Yairi & Ambrose, 1992a, Yairi & Ambrose, 1992b, Yairi & Ambrose, 1999, Yairi et al., 1993, Yairi et al., 1996. The longitudinal research of this study is similar to that of Yairi et al. (1996) in age of children (2 to 5 years of age), observation over several years, repeated administration of speech and language tests, and objectives (e.g., to develop or discover predictive measures of spontaneous recovery or persistence of stuttering in preschool children by studying and comparing children who persist with those who recover) although this study differs in several important ways (e.g., sample size).
Bernstein Ratner (1997) and Nippold (1990) have provided excellent reviews of many cross-sectional studies of the speech and language skills of children who stutter, including some comparisons with nonstuttering children. The major findings so far have been that some children who stutter may have slightly reduced language proficiency when compared to controls (e.g., Ryan, 1992, Watkins & Yairi, 1997, Watkins et al., 1999, Yairi et al., 1996) and that more complex linguistic utterances are more often stuttered Bernstein Ratner & Sih, 1987, Gaines et al., 1991, Logan & Conture, 1995, Ryan, 2000c.
It is generally agreed that the incidence of articulation/phonological deficits in children who stutter is relatively high Blood & Seider, 1981, Bloodstein, 1995, Louko et al., 1990, Nippold, 1990, Paden et al., 1999, Ryan, 1992, St. Louis & Hinzman, 1988, Williams & Silverman, 1968, Wolk et al., 1993, Yaruss et al., 1998, although Ryan (1992) found no significant differences in articulation test scores of stuttering and nonstuttering children. Throneburg, Yairi, and Paden (1994) observed that stutterings were not due to the phonological difficulty of disfluent words or of words that followed them. Paden and Yairi (1996) and Yairi et al. (1996) stated that although preschool children who stutter may initially show more phonological problems than do nonstuttering controls, those who recover do not differ in phonological ability from those who persist, but their discriminant analysis did include phonological proficiency. Beyond the oft-reported cooccurrence of articulation or phonological processing problems in children who stutter (e.g., 37.4%, Yaruss et al., 1998) little is known about the bases of this association Paden & Yairi, 1996, Paden et al., 1999.
Using age-adjusted scoring, Paden et al. (1999) found that children with persistent stuttering scored worse than did recovered children in five of six age-group comparisons of phonological process analyses. Other findings included: (a) there were more children with moderate and severe phonological process errors in the persistent group, (b) the two groups did not differ from normally developing children in their path of development, and (c) the percentage of errors on phonological patterns was not predictive of recovery or persistence. Paden et al. (p. 1113) concluded that, “The results indicate that the children whose stuttering would be persistent had poorer mean [phonological process] scores on each of our measures than did the children who would recover from stuttering.” These analyses were limited somewhat because sample size of the subgroups proscribed inferential statistical analysis. Although phonological process analysis might provide different results from articulation or phonetic analyses of children who stutter, both measures are related and might be expected to yield related, perhaps, similar results (Garett & Moran, 1992).
Yairi et al. (1996) observed that the 12 children who persisted in stuttering displayed lower language scores than did the 20 who recovered. Watkins and Yairi (1997) reported that only 1 out of the 32 children (3%) had a possible clinical language problem. A discriminant analysis employing phonological processing and language test findings correctly placed 81.3% of the children into either recovered or persistent groups. However, the mean lenghts of utterance, numbers of different words, and total words did not differ between those who recovered and those who persisted in stuttering. Watkins et al. (1999) studying expressive language in conversation found that language ability did not differentiate persistent from recovered children who stutter. Watkins and Yairi, Watkins et al., and Yairi et al. concluded that stuttering and language are related, but the nature of that relationship is not clear.
A number of studies of speaking rate and stuttering have reported findings from cross-sectional comparisons of stuttering and nonstuttering children (e.g., Kelly & Conture, 1992, Meyers & Freeman, 1985, Ryan, 1992, Ryan, 2000c) or case studies such as that reported by Guitar, Schaefer, Donahue-Kilburg, and Bond (1992) or Stephenson-Opsal and Ratner (1988). The major findings have been that there are (a) no significant differences in speaking rate between stuttering and nonstuttering preschool-age children and (b) few significant correlations between stuttering and speaking rate or between speaking rate and other linguistic variables Kelly & Conture, 1992, Ryan, 1992, Ryan, 2000c. One exception is the finding of Kloth, Janssen, Kraaiamaat, and Brutten (1995) who observed significantly higher articulation rates in a group of young preschool-age children who were stuttering a year later compared to the rates of those children who did not begin to stutter. Hall, Amir, and Yairi (1999) reported findings from three sets of measures obtained over 2 years from 24 children (eight recovered, eight persisted, and eight normally fluent), using two measures of articulation rate (syllables per second and phones per second). They found that the children who recovered spoke nonsignificantly slower, as measured by syllables per second, than the other group for three comparisons but that both stuttering groups spoke significantly slower than did the control group as measured by phones per second. The three groups combined had a significant increase in speaking rate over the 2 years of the study.
The major available information about the prediction concerning persistence of, or recovery from, stuttering is found in Yairi et al. (1996, p. 73) who concluded that generally “…(a) age at onset, (b) duration of the disorder, (c) family history of persistent and recovered stuttering, and (d) scores on language/nonverbal measures…” were promising predictors, especially age of onset and language proficiency as first reported by Yairi (1983). Sex was later added as a predictive factor with more females than males recovering from stuttering (e.g., Månsson, 2000, Watkins & Yairi, 1997, Yairi & Ambrose, 1999). Perhaps surprisingly, severity of stuttering has not held much predictive promise because many children have shown severe stuttering, only to naturally recover from the problem apparently without assistance Yairi & Ambrose, 1992a, Yairi & Ambrose, 1992b, although extremely severe stuttering may be a predictor of persistence Ryan, 1990, Ryan, 2000b. Little is known about the specific contributions of articulation or phonological processing and linguistic proficiency and speaking rate, nor the interaction among them, to the development of stuttering although past research suggests a relationship Paden & Yairi, 1996, Watkins & Yairi, 1997, Watkins et al., 1999.
The purposes of this study of 16 of the male and female preschool stuttering children from Ryan (1992) and 6 others were to: (a) describe their articulation, language, stuttering, and speaking rate development over a 2-year period; (b) identify any differences between the children with persistent stuttering and those who recovered; (c) study the interactions between and among these variables; and (d) identify variables that predict recovery from or persistence in stuttering.
Section snippets
Participants
The 22 children who stuttered (14 males and 8 females) were referred by their parents and met the following criteria: (a) produced more than 3.0 stuttered words per minute (SW/M: whole-word repetitions, part-word repetitions, prolongations, and struggle divided by the time talked) on the Fluency Interview (FI) Ryan, 1974, Ryan, 1992, Ryan, 2000b, Ryan, 2000c, Ryan & Van Kirk, 1978, (b) spoke English as their first language, and (c) were perceived by one or both parents as a child who stuttered.
Placement of children in recovered or persistent groups
The criteria used to identify the recovered (n=15) and persistent (n=7) groups included: (a) SW/M at the fourth test period with levels below 3.0 SW/M identifying natural recoveries Ryan, 1974, Ryan, 1992, Ryan, 2000a, Ryan, 2000b; (b) the trend in SW/M for each individual child, with stable or increasing SW/M over Test Periods 1 to 4, indicating persistence and decreases indicating recovery; and (c) SW/M at follow-up test periods (up to 10 years for some children) using 3.0 SW/M to identify
Discussion
These results and those of Yairi et al. (1996) and others (e.g., Johannsen, 1997) demonstrate the value of longitudinal research to understanding the natural course of development of stuttering and its treatment. The primary finding of this study was that measures of articulation and language skills appear to have little value in identifying persistent or transient stuttering problems. Although many of these children displayed severe, early stuttering, many of them recovered, suggesting that
Acknowledgements
Thanks to the children and their mothers and to the 30 graduate students of CSULB, especially Karen Allen and Cheryl Marsh, who did the testing and first-order data analysis: Susan Alcarez, Karen Avery, Kim Balin, Merle Barkan, Cheryl Brock, Nancy Crosby, Gina Ferry, Michael Freeman, Kay Gladden, Jennifer Graves, Linda Livingston, Cheryl Marsh, Beth Matarano, Jodi Muriyama, Kim Nixon, Beverly Plass, Cathy Quinn, Dede Ray, Darlene Richardson, Beverly Slawinski, Mary Jane Sorci, Susan Takata,
References (55)
- et al.
Speech–motor and linguistic skills of young stutterers prior to onset
Journal of Fluency Disorders
(1995) - et al.
Phonological characteristics of young stutterers and their normally fluent peers: preliminary observations
Journal of Fluency Disorders
(1990) Prediction of spontaneous recovery in preschool children who stutter (abstract)
Journal of Fluency Disorders
(2000)- et al.
A descriptive study of speech, language and hearing characteristics of school-aged stutterers
Journal of Fluency Disorders
(1988) - et al.
Maternal speech rate modification and childhood stuttering
Journal of Fluency Disorders
(1988) - et al.
Predictive factors of persistence and recovery: pathways of childhood stuttering
Journal of Communicative Disorders
(1996) - et al.
The syndrome of stuttering
(1964) Arizona Articulation Proficiency Scale
(1973)Stuttering: a psycholinguistic perspective
- et al.
Effects of gradual increases in sentence length and complexity on children's disfluency
Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders
(1987)
The concomitant problems of young stutterers
Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders
A handbook on stuttering
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test
A comparison of young stutterer's fluent versus stuttered utterances on measures of length and complexity
Journal of Speech and Hearing Research
A comparison of phonological severity measures
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools
Parent verbal interactions and speech rate: a case study in stuttering
Journal of Speech and Hearing Research
A longitudinal investigation of speaking rate in preschool children who stutter
Journal of Speech and Hearing Research
Guidelines for documentation of treatment efficacy for young children who stutter
Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research
On learning from speech–motor control research on stuttering
Design of the longitudinal study and the influence of symptomatology, heredity, sex ratio, and lateral dominance on the further development of stuttering
A five-year longitudinal study of stuttering in children underway
Speaking rates, response time latencies, and interrupting behaviors of young stutterers, nonstutterers, and their mothers
Journal of Speech and Hearing Research
Length, grammatical complexity, and rate differences in stuttered and fluent conversational utterances of children who stutter
Journal of Fluency Disorders
Childhood stuttering: incidence and development
Journal of Fluency Disorders
Single-child experimental designs in communicative disorders
Mother and child speech rates as a variable in stuttering and disfluency
Journal of Speech and Hearing Research
Cited by (38)
The recovery rate of early stuttering
2020, Journal of Fluency DisordersCitation Excerpt :In other cases, the presence of stuttering was confirmed through a pre-defined severity rating. In cases where verification of stuttering occurred through direct measures, the method varies across studies, using the number of stuttering like disfluencies (SLDs) (Ambrose et al., 1997, 2015; Leech et al., 2017; Spencer & Weber-Fox, 2014; Yairi & Ambrose, 1992; Yairi, Ambrose, & Niermann, 1993; Yairi, Ambrose, Paden, & Throneburg, 1996), stuttered disfluencies (Hollister et al., 2017; Zengin-Bolatkale, Conture, Walden, & Jones, 2018), or stuttered words per minute (Ryan, 2001). Cut-offs for inclusion also vary across studies however, the number is usually 3, whichever measure is used.
Recovery from stuttering in preschool-age children: 9 year outcomes in a clinical population
2018, Journal of Fluency DisordersFluency Bank: A new resource for fluency research and practice
2018, Journal of Fluency DisordersCitation Excerpt :To date some prognostic cues have emerged, starting with the groundbreaking work of Yairi, Ambrose, Paden & Throneburg (1996), using longitudinal data from the Illinois Stuttering Project (numerous publications summarized in Yairi & Ambrose, 2004). These include profiles of disfluency over time (also identified by Ryan, 2001), and initial phonological/articulatory skills (e.g., the Purdue cohort (Smith & Weber(Fox) and colleagues [e.g., Spencer & Weber-Fox, 2014]), and others [e.g., Kloth, Kraiimaat, Janssen & Brutten, 2000]). Conture and colleagues (e.g., Louko, Edwards & Conture, 1990) have also reported phonological skill differences in numerous publications, primarily between CWS and typical peers.
Children who stutter at 3 years of age: A community-based study
2018, Journal of Fluency DisordersCitation Excerpt :Among the 32 children who stuttered, 24 children appeared to have regained fluent speech skills without reported intervention (82.8%, after omitting families lost to follow-up). This value is similar to the commonly accepted rate of about 80% recovery from stuttering, and is close to the recovery rates of 68% (Ryan, 2001), 76% (Yairi & Ambrose, 2005), 71.4% (Månsson, 2000), and 87.6% (Dworzynski, Remington, Rijsdijk, Howell, & Plomin, 2007) reported in other studies. Please note again that we do not consider our data to provide firm estimates of recovery, as it is usually defined, because of its very narrow window of observation.
Phonological complexity in school-aged children who stutter and exhibit a language disorder
2015, Journal of Fluency DisordersSpeech sound articulation abilities of preschool-age children who stutter
2013, Journal of Fluency DisordersCitation Excerpt :Relatively few published studies have reported findings of the association between young CWS’ articulation and their stuttering frequency, type, and severity. Ryan (1992, 2001) reported no significant correlation between preschool-age CWS’ stuttering frequency and their articulation abilities. St. Louis and Hinzman (1988) reported that school-age CWS with severe stuttering exhibited significantly more articulation errors than those with moderate stuttering severity, a finding that did not replicate in a later study (St. Louis, 1991).