Frequency and typology of disfluencies: comparative analysis between clutterers and stutterers
Frequência e tipologia das disfluências: análise comparativa entre taquifêmicos e gagos
Jaqueline Bergamo de Souza; Francine Custódio Paschoalino; Vanessa Moraes Cardoso; Cristiane Moço Canhetti de Oliveira
Abstract
Purpose: to quantify and to compare the typology of disfluencies in the speech of adults who clutter and adults with developmental persistent stuttering.
Method: participants of this investigation were 15 adults, divided in two groups: Group of Adults Who Clutter, composed by 5 individuals and Group of Adults Who Stutter, composed by 10 subjects. The procedures used were: Assessment of Fluency, Predictive Cluttering Inventory and Stuttering Severity Instrument.
Results: the data indicated that the groups differed regarding the occurrence of other disfluencies (p=0,021) and stuttering-like disfluencies (p<0,001). The analysis for the types of other disfluencies revealed that there was statistically significant difference for the interjections, revision and unfinished word. The Group of Adults Who Stutter showed statistically significant increase of all the types of stuttering-like disfluencies.
Conclusion: the group of adults who clutter showed increase of the occurrence of the other disfluencies, whereas the group of adults who stutter showed increase in the occurrence of the stuttering-like disfluencies. The other disfluencies were variable in both groups and those who clutter show less types of stuttering-like disfluencies when compared to those who stutter.
Keywords
Resumo
Objetivo: quantificar e comparar as tipologias das disfluências da fala de adultos com taquifemia e adultos com gagueira desenvolvimental persistente.
Método: participaram 15 adultos, divididos em dois grupos: Grupo de Pessoas com Taquifemia, composto por 5 adultos com taquifemia e Grupo de Pessoas com Gagueira, composto por 10 adultos com gagueira. Os procedimentos utilizados foram: avaliação da fluência, Inventário Preditivo de Taquifemia e Instrumento de Gravidade da Gagueira.
Resultados: os grupos apresentaram diferenças estatisticamente significantes para o total de disfluências comuns (p=0,021) e de disfluências gagas (p<0,001). Quanto à tipologia de disfluências comuns, interjeição, revisão e palavra não terminada apresentaram diferenças significantes. Todos os tipos de disfluencias gagas foram manifestados com maior ocorrência no grupo de gagueira, com diferença estatisticamente significante.
Conclusão: o grupo de pessoas com taquifemia apresentou aumento da frequência de disfluencias comuns, enquanto que o grupo de pessoas com gagueira apresentou aumento na frequencia de disfluências gagas. As disfluências comuns foram variadas em ambos os grupos e taquifêmicos mostraram menos tipos de disfluências gagas em relação aos taquifêmicos.
Palavras-chave
Referências
1. Smith A, Goffman L, Sasisekaran J, Weber-Fox C. Language and motor abilities of preschool children who stutter: Evidence from behavioral and kinematic indices of nonword repetition performance. J Fluency Disord. No prelo 2012.
2. Tran Y, Blumgart E, Craig A. Subjective distress associated with chronic stuttering. J Fluency Disord. 2011;36:17-26.
3. Yaruss JS. Assessing quality of life in stuttering treatment outcomes research. J Fluency Disord. 2010;35:190-202.
4. Bloostein O, Bernstein Ratner N. A handbook on stuttering (6 edi). Clifton Park, NY: Thomson/Delmar Learning. 2008.
5. Bakhtiar M, Seifpanahi S, Ansari H, Ghanadzade M, Packman A. Investigation of the reliability of the SSI-3 for preschool Persian-speaking children who stutter. J Fluency Disord. 2010;35(2):87-91.
6. Wagovich SA, Hall NE, Cliffor BA. Speech disruptions in relation to language growth in children who stutter: An exploratory study. J Fluency Disord. 2009;34(4):242-56.
7. St Louis KO, Schulte K. Defining cluttering: the lowest common denominator. In: Ward D, Scott KS (org). Cluttering: A handbook of research, intervention and education. East Sussex: Psychology Press. 2011. P. 233-53.
8. LaSalle LR, Wolk L. Stuttering, cluttering and phonological complexity: Case studies. J Fluency Disord. 2011;36:285-9.
9. Van Zaalen Y, Wijnen F, DeJonckere PH. Differential diagnostic characteristics between cluttering and stuttering: parte one. J Fluency Disord. 2009;34(3):137-54.
10. Bretherton-Furness J. Ward D. Lexical access, story re-telling and sequencing skills in adults who clutter and those who do not. J Fluency Disord. No prelo 2012.
11. Van Zaalen op´tHof Y, Myers F, Ward D, Bennett E. The International Cluttering Association, Clinical Issues Committee: Cluttering Assessment. [cited 2012 Jul 30]. Available from http://associations.missouristate.edu/ica/
12. Oliveira CMC. Taquifemia: uma revisão teórica. J Bras Fonoaudiol. 2001;2:23-8.
13. ASHA. Special Interest Division 4: Fluency and Fluency Disorders (1999, march). Terminology pertaining to fluency and fluency disorders: Guidelines. Asha 41(Suppl), 1999;29-36.
14. Oliveira CMC, Bernardes APL, Broglio GAF, Capellini SA. Perfil da fluência de indivíduos com taquifemia. Pró-Fono R Atual Cient. 2010;22(4):445-50.
15. Andrade CRF. Perfil da fluência da fala: parâmetros comparativos diferenciados por idade para crianças, adolescentes, adultos e idosos. Barueri (SP), Pró-Fono, 2006. 1 CD-ROM. (Série Livros Digitais de Pesquisas Financiadas por Agências de Fomento).
16. Daly DA. Predictive of Cluttering Inventory (PCI) (2006). In: International Cluttering Association. [cited 2012 Jul 30]. Available from http://associations.missouristate.edu/ica/
17. Riley G. Stuttering severity instrument for young children (SSI-3). 3a ed.. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed; 1994.
18. Myers FL, Bakker K, St. Louis KO, Raphael LJ. Disfluencies in Cluttered Speech. J Fluency Disord. 2012;37(1):9-19.
19. LaSalle LR, Wolk L. Stuttering, cluttering, and phonological complexity: case studies. J Fluency Disord. 2011;36(4):285-9.
20. Roberts PM, Meltzer A, Wilding J. Disfluencies in non-stuttering adults across sample lengths and topics. J Fluency Disord. 2009;42(6):414-27.
21. Martins VO, Andrade CRF. Perfil evolutivo da fluência da fala de falantes do português brasileiro. Pró-Fono R Atual Cient. 2008;20(1):7-12.
22. Sussman HM, Byrd CT, Guitar B. The integrity of anticipatory coarticulation in fluent and non-fluent tokens of adults who stutter. Clin Linguist Phon. 2011;25(3):169-86.
23. Myers FL, St Louis KO. Two youths who clutter, but is that the only similarity? J Fluency Disord. 1996;21:297-304.
24. Daly da, Burnett ml. Cluttering: Traditional views and new perspectives. In: Curlee RF, editor. Stuttering and related disorders of fluency. New York: Thieme; 1999. p. 222-54.
25. Teigland A. A study of pragmatic skills of cluttering and normal speakers. J Fluency Disord. 1996;21:201-14.
26. Bohnen AJ. Estudo das palavras gaguejadas por crianças e adultos: caracterizando a gagueira como um distúrbio da linguagem [tese]. Porto Alegre (RS): Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul; 2009.
Submetido em:
01/10/2012
Aceito em:
10/03/2013
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
Email