Cited by 91Stuttering Research and TreatmentLanguage Development and DisordersNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism

Childhood stuttering and dissociations across linguistic domains

Anderson, Julie D., Pellowski, Mark W., Conture, Edward G.·2005·Journal of Fluency Disorders

Abstract

Unlabelled The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the possible presence of dissociations in the speech and language skills of young children who do (CWS) and do not stutter (CWNS) using a correlation-based statistical procedure [Bates, E., Appelbaum, M., Salcedo, J., Saygin, A. P., & Pizzamiglio, L. (2003). Quantifying dissociations in neuropsychological research. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 25, 1128-1153]. Participants were 45 preschool CWS and 45 CWNS between the ages of 3;0 and 5;11 (years;months), with the two groups matched by age, gender, race, and parental socioeconomic status. Children participated in a parent-child interaction for the purpose of disfluency analysis and responded to four standardized speech-language tests for subsequent analyses as main dependent variables. Findings indicated that CWS were over three times more likely than CWNS to exhibit dissociations across speech-language domains, with 44 cases of dissociation for CWS and 14 for CWNS across 10 possible comparisons. Results suggest that there may be a subgroup of CWS who exhibit dissociations across speech-language domains, which may result in a greater susceptibility to breakdowns in speech fluency.Educational objectives The reader will be able to: (1) summarize findings from previous studies examining differences in speech and language performance between children who do and do not stutter; (2) describe what is meant by "dissociations" in the speech and language skills of young children who do and do not stutter; and (3) discuss three hypotheses that could account for the present findings that suggest CWS, more often than CWNS, exhibit dissociations in their speech-language system.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jfludis.2005.05.006

Cites

111 of 111 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Anderson, J. D., Pellowski, M. W., & Conture, E. G.
Affiliations
  • Indiana University Bloomington (US)
  • Towson University (US)
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
Corresponding author
Anderson, Julie D.
Venue
Journal of Fluency Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-01
Volume
30
Issue
3
Pages
219-253
ISSN
0094-730X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2053016482
Cited by
91
References
111
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 5
FWCI
3.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Fluency Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (DC 00523, R01DC000523)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Stuttering Research and Treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Keywords
childhood stuttering, dissociation, preschool children, speech fluency, speech and language assessment
MeSH terms
Child, Child, Preschool, Female, Humans, Language Disorders, Language Tests, Male, Speech Disorders, Stuttering, Observer Variation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review