Temporal factors in the effects of masking noise on fluency of stutterers
References (36)
Studies on the metronome effect on stuttering
Behav. Res. Ther.
(1969)Reduced auditory feedback and stuttering
Behav. Res. Ther.
(1969)- et al.
Experiments upon the total inhibition of stammering by external control and some clinical results
J. Psychosom. Res.
(1956) Rhythm as a distractor in the modification of stuttering
Behav. Res. Ther.
(1967)- et al.
An experimental investigation of the effect of rhythm on the speech of stutterers
Behav. Res. Ther.
(1965) The effect of a metronome on the speech of young stutterers
Behav. Ther.
(1970)The loci of stutterings in the speech sequence
J. Speech Dis.
(1945)- et al.
The stuttering problem considered from an automatic control point of view
Folia Phoniatr.
(1966) - et al.
Reply to “Masking of auditory feedback in stutterers' speech.”
J. Speech Hearing Res.
(1968) The influence of noise on stutterers' different disfluency types
An experimental study of the relationship between selected temporal aspects of auditory masking and the frequency of stuttering
Dynamics of the acoustic reflex: phenomenological aspects
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
Comparison of classical conditioning and relational learning
J. Exp. Psychol.
Experimental design in psychological research
Certain effects of alterations in auditory feedback
Folia Phoniatr.
The effect of limitations on the number of criterion score values on the significance level of the F-test
Am. Educ. Res. J.
Diagnostic methods in speech pathology
The effects of noise on man
Cited by (6)
Impact of auditory feedback alterations in individuals with stuttering
2021, Brazilian Journal of OtorhinolaryngologyCitation Excerpt :The increase in the speech fluency promotion of individuals with severe stuttering was not caused by the decrease in the speech rate, disagreeing with a previous study.12 The results found in this study corroborate others showing that the decrease in the number of disfluencies is not associated with reduced speech rate.13,16–18,25,26,29,41 It is also noteworthy that the reduction in speech rate is not desirable for individuals who stutter, since this characteristic manifests due to the excess number of disfluencies42–45 and/or articulatory slowing down.46
Abnormal auditory synchronization in stuttering: A magnetoencephalographic study
2017, Hearing ResearchCitation Excerpt :Stuttering is a developmental disorder that affects speech fluency. People who stutter (PWS) can temporarily decrease their rate of stuttering by using a metronome, masking noise, or altering auditory feedback (Altrows and Bryden, 1977; Andrews et al., 1983; Hampton and Weber-Fox, 2008; Kalinowski et al., 1993; Lincoln et al., 2006). Recent advances in the pathophysiology of stutter have suggested that multiple neural systems in both hemispheres are involved in stutter generation.
Spatiotemporal signatures of an abnormal auditory system in stuttering
2011, NeuroImageCitation Excerpt :The mechanism of stuttering is still a matter of debate. People who stutter (PWS) decrease their stuttering rates temporarily under masking noise and altered auditory feedback, which is not only because of the resulting slower speech rate but also because of altered auditory input (Altrows and Bryden, 1977; Kalinowski et al., 1993; Lincoln et al., 2006; Hampton and Weber-Fox, 2008). This suggests that auditory input processing could be different in PWS compared with non-stuttering subjects.
Overreliance on auditory feedback may lead to sound/syllable repetitions: Simulations of stuttering and fluency-inducing conditions with a neural model of speech production
2010, Journal of Fluency DisordersCitation Excerpt :Studies where subjects are explicitly instructed how to reduce the rate of their speech (e.g., Davidow et al., 2009; Perkins et al., 1979) should help clarify the relative contribution to fluency of the various rate reduction methods. Masking noise (constant binaural white noise) significantly reduces the average frequency of stuttering (for review see Andrews et al., 1983, p. 233; Bloodstein, 1995, p. 345; R. R. Martin, Johnson, Siegel, & Haroldson, 1985, p. 492; Van Riper, 1982, p. 380; Wingate, 1970), with the reduction being the greatest for sound/syllable repetitions (Altrows & Bryden, 1977; Conture & Brayton, 1975; Hutchinson & Norris, 1977). Some have argued that masking noise completely blocks auditory feedback (Andrews et al., 1982; Sherrard, 1975; Stromsta, 1972; Van Riper, 1982, p. 382), but this is inconsistent with PWS's frequent reports that they keep hearing themselves above the noise (Adams & Moore, 1972; Shane, 1955).
Auditory neuroscience applied to stuttering
2013, Japan Journal of Logopedics and PhoniatricsExperimental investigation of the effects of frequency-altered auditory feedback on the speech of adults who stutter
1997, Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research