Immediate effect of delayed auditory feedback on stuttering-like disfluencies
Efeito imediato do atraso da retroalimentação auditiva nas disfluências típicas da gagueira
Paula Bianca Meireles de Moura Buzzeti; Cristiane Moço Canhetti de Oliveira
Abstract
Objective: to describe the immediate effects of delayed auditory feedback on stuttering-like disfluencies in people who stutter.
Methods: a cross-sectional and experimental study. The effect of delayed auditory feedback was analyzed in thirty individuals, from eight to 46 years old, diagnosed with persistent developmental stuttering. Participants should present at least 3% of stuttering-like disfluencies and mild stuttering according to the Stuttering Severity Instrument. The following procedures were used: audiological evaluation, fluency evaluation in two listening situations – with Non-altered and delayed auditory feedback - and the Stuttering Severity Instrument. The Fono Tools software was used to cause the delay effect. Data analysis was performed using pertinent statistical tests.
Results: there was no decrease in most stuttering-like disfluencies. There was a statistically significant reduction in word repetition and flow of syllables per minute.
Conclusion: the delay in auditory feedback caused, as an immediate effect, the reduction of word repetition and speech rate, in syllables per minute.
Keywords
Resumo
Objetivo: descrever os efeitos imediatos do atraso na retroalimentação auditiva sobre as disfluências típicas da gagueira, em indivíduos com gagueira.
Métodos: estudo transversal e experimental. Foram analisados trinta indivíduos, de oito a 46 anos, diagnosticados com gagueira do desenvolvimento persistente. Os participantes deveriam apresentar, no mínimo, 3% de disfluências típicas da gagueira e gagueira leve de acordo com o Instrumento de Gravidade da Gagueira. Os procedimentos realizados foram: avaliação audiológica, avaliação da fluência em duas situações de escuta - com retroalimentação auditiva habitual e atrasada - e o Instrumento de Gravidade da Gagueira. O software Fono Tools foi utilizado para provocar o efeito de atraso. A análise dos dados foi realizada por meio da aplicação de testes estatísticos pertinentes.
Resultados: não houve diminuição da maioria das disfluências típicas da gagueira. Houve redução estatisticamente significante das repetições de palavras e do fluxo de sílabas por minuto.
Conclusão: o atraso na retroalimentação auditiva ocasionou como efeito imediato a redução das repetições de palavras e da taxa de articulação em sílabas por minuto.
Palavras-chave
References
1. Hudock D, Kalinowski J. Stuttering inhibition via altered auditory feedback during scripted telephone conversations. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2014;49(1):139-47.
2. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th. ed. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2013.
3. Andrade CRF. Gagueira infantil: risco, diagnóstico e programas terapêuticos. Barueri (SP): Pró-fono; 2006.
4. Bloodstein O, Bernstein Ratner N. A handbook on stuttering. 6 ed. Clifton Park (NY): Thomson Delmar Learning; 2008.
5. Yairi E, Ambrose N. Epidemiology of stuttering: 21st century advances. J Fluency Disord. 2013;38(2):66-87.
6. Oliveira CMC, Yaruss JS, Quesal RW, Nogueira PR, Lasmar MTPM, Marcondes E et al. Overall assessment of the speaker's experience of stuttering: brazilian Portuguese. Pro-Fono R Atual. Cientif. 2012;24(4):367-74.
7. Yairi E, Ambrose NG. Early childhood stuttering I: persistency and recovery rates. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1999;42(5):1097-112.
8. Yaruss JS. Application of the ICF in fluency disorders. Semin Speech Lang. 2007;28(4):312-22.
9. Smith A, Weber C. How stuttering develops: the multifactorial dynamic pathways theory. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2017;60(9):2483-505.
10. Etchell AC, Ryan M, Martin E, Johnson BW, Sowman PF. Abnormal time course of low beta modulation in non-fluent preschool children: a magnetoencephalographic study of rhythm tracking. Neuroimage. 2016;125:953-63.
11. Sares AG, Deroche MLD, Shiller DM, Gracco VL. Timing variability of sensorimotor integration during vocalization in individuals who stutter. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):16340.
12. Yairi E, Ambrose N. Early childhood stuttering. Austin: Pro-Ed; 2005.
13. Andrade CRF, Sassi FC, Juste FS, Mendonça LIZ. Atypical Cerebral Lateralization in Adults Who Stutter. Pro-Fono R Atual. Cientif. 2008;20(1):61-4.
14. Beal DS, Cheyne DO, Gracco VL, Quraan MA, Taylor MJ, De Nil LF. Auditory evoked fields to vocalization during passive listening and active generation in adults who stutter. Neuroimage. 2010;52(4):1645-53.
15. Beal DS, Quraan MA, Cheyne DO, Taylor MJ, Gracco VL, De Nil LF. Speech-induced suppression of evoked auditory fields in children who stutter. Neuroimage. 2011;54(4):2994-3003.
16. Foundas AL, Mock JR, Cindass JRR, Corey DM. Atypical caudate anatomy in children who stutter. Percept Mot Skills. 2013;116(2):528-43.
17. Antipova EA, Purdy SC, Blakeley M, Williams S. Effects of altered auditory feedback (AAF) on stuttering frequency during monologue speech production. J Fluency Disord. 2008;33(4):274-90.
18. Unger JP, Glück CW, Cholewa J. Immediate effects of AAF on the fluency of adults who stutter in complex syntactic clauses. J Fluency Disord. 2012;37(2):122-34.
19. Foundas AL, Mock JR, Corey DM, Golob EJ, Conture EG. The SpeechEasy device in stuttering and nonstuttering adults: fluency effects while speaking and reading. Brain Lang. 2013;126(2):141-50.
20. Lincoln M, Packman A, Onslow M. Altered auditory feedback and the treatment of stuttering: a review. J Fluency Disord. 2006;31(2):71-89.
21. Hudock D, Dayalu VN, Saltuklaroglu T, Stuart A, Zhang J, Kalinowski J. Stuttering inhibition via visual feedback at normal and fast speech rates. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2011;46(2):169-78.
22. Bauerly KR, Jones RM, Miller C. Effects of social stress on autonomic, behavioral, and acoustic parameters in adults who stutter. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2019;62(7):2185-202.
23. Pollard R, Ellis JB, Finan D, Ramig PR. Effects of the SpeechEasy on objective and perceived aspects of stuttering: a 6-month, phase I clinical trial in naturalistic environments. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2009;52(2):516-33.
24. Riley G. SSI-3: Stuttering Severity Instrument for children and adults. Austin: Pro-Ed; 1994.
25. Andrade CRF. Protocolo para avaliação da fluência da fala. Pro-Fono R Atual. Cientif. 2000;12(2):131-4.
26. Comitê de Audiologia da Sociedade Brasileira de Fonoaudiologia. Período de tempo para realização da avaliação audiológica básica. São Paulo; 2017.
27. Hargrave S, Kalinowski J, Stuart A, Armson J, Jones K. Effect of frequency-altered feedback on stuttering frequency at normal and fast speech rates. J Speech Hear Res. 1994;37(6):1313-9.
28. Stuart A, Kalinowski J, Rastatter MP, Lynch K. Effect of delayed auditory feedback on normal speakers at two speech rates. J Acoust Soc Am. 2002;111(5):2237-41.
29. Lincoln M, Walker C. A survey of Australian adults' use, knowledge and views of altered auditory feedback devices as a treatment for stuttering. Speech Lang Hear. 2007;9:95-104.
30. Zimmerman S, Kalinowski J, Stuart A, Rastatter M. Effect of altered auditory feedback on people who stutter during scripted telephone conversations. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1997;40(5):1130-4.
31. Picoloto LA, Cardoso ACV, Cerqueira AV, Oliveira CMC. Influence of auditory processing on phonological awareness in stuttering people. Rev. CEFAC. 2017;19(1):59-66.
32. Stager SV, Jeffries KJ, Braun AR. Common features of fluency-evoking conditions studied in stuttering subjects and controls: an H(2)15O PET study. J Fluency Disord. 2003;28(4):319-36.
33. Andrade CRF, Juste F. Proposta de análise de performance e de evolução em criança com gagueira desenvolvimental. Rev. CEFAC. 2005;7(2):158-70.
34. Riaz N, Steinberg S, Ahmad J, Pluzhnikov A, Riazuddin S, Cox NJ et al. Genomewide significant linkage to stuttering on chromosome 12. Am J Hum Genet. 2005;76(4):647-51.
35. Lincoln M, Packman A, Onslow M. An experimental investigation of the effect of altered auditory feedback on the conversational speech of adults who stutter. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2010;53(5):1122-31.
36. Goldiamond I. Stuttering and fluency as manipulatable operant response classes. In: Krasner L, Ulmann L (eds). Research in behavior modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston; 1965. p.106-56.
37. Kalinowski J, Armson J, Roland-Mieszkowski M, Stuart A, Gracco VL. Effects of alterations in auditory feedback and speech rate on stuttering frequency. Lang Speech. 1993;36 (Pt 1):1-16.
38. Andrade CRF, Cervone LM, Sassi FC. Relationship between the stuttering severity index and speech rate. Sao Paulo Med J. 2003;121(2):81-4.
39. Picoloto LA, Cardoso ACV, Cerqueira AV, Oliveira CMC. Effectiveness of delayed auditory feedback in adults with stuttering. Audiol., Commun. Res. 2017;22:e1761.
40. Sparks G, Grant DE, Millay K, Walker-Batson D, Hynan LS. The effect of fast speech rate on stuttering frequency during delayed auditory feedback. J Fluency Disord. 2002;27(3):187-200.
Submitted date:
12/11/2017
Accepted date:
04/03/2018
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
Email