CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 95Stuttering Research and TreatmentAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

Identifying correlates of self-stigma in adults who stutter: Further establishing the construct validity of the Self-Stigma of Stuttering Scale (4S)

Boyle, Michael P.·2015·Journal of Fluency Disorders
DOI 10.1016/j.jfludis.2014.12.002
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose This study was set up to further establish the construct validity of the Self-Stigma of Stuttering Scale (4S) by demonstrating its associations with other established scales and replicating its original factor structure and reliability estimates.Method Web surveys were completed by 354 adults who stutter recruited from Board Certified Specialists in Fluency Disorders, and adult chapters of the National Stuttering Association. Participants completed a series of psychometrically validated scales measuring self-stigma, hope, empowerment, quality of life, social support, anxiety, depression, and self-rated speech disruption.Results Higher subscale and total stigma scores on the 4S were associated with significantly lower levels of hope, empowerment, quality of life, and social support, and significantly higher levels of anxiety, depression, and self-rated speech disruption. The original factor structure of the 4S was replicated, and reliability estimates of the subscales ranged from adequate to excellent.Conclusions The findings of this study support the construct validity of the 4S and its use by clinicians and researchers intending to measure the construct of self-stigma in adults who stutter.Educational objectives Readers should be able to: (a) distinguish between the various components of self-stigma; (b) describe how the various components of the self-stigma model relate to hope, empowerment, quality of life, and social support, self-rated speech disruption, anxiety, and depression; (c) summarize the psychometric properties of the Self-Stigma of Stuttering Scale (4S) in terms of reliability, factor structure, and construct validity; (d) discuss how the 4S could be used in research and clinical practice.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jfludis.2014.12.002

Cites

55 of 55 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?

  • Elevated rates of speech disfluencies have been linked to negative social perceptions of the speaker.

    “Disfluencies affect how speakers are perceived by others, and elevated rates of speech disfluencies have been linked to negative social perceptions of the speaker [8, 22, 45].”

    From Linguistic camouflage in girls with autism spectrum disorder (2017) · cites this paper as [8]

  • Disfluencies affect how speakers are perceived by others.

    “Disfluencies affect how speakers are perceived by others, and elevated rates of speech disfluencies have been linked to negative social perceptions of the speaker [8, 22, 45].”

    From Linguistic camouflage in girls with autism spectrum disorder (2017) · cites this paper as [8]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Boyle, M. P.
Affiliations
Oklahoma State University (US)
Corresponding author
Boyle, Michael P.
ORCID
Boyle, Michael P.
Venue
Journal of Fluency Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-03
Volume
43
Pages
17-27
ISSN
0094-730X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jfludis.2014.12.002
OpenAlex
W1976516946
Cited by
95
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 2
FWCI
9.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Fluency Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Stuttering Research and Treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
self-stigma, stuttering, construct validity, factor structure, reliability statistics, hope, empowerment, quality of life, social support, anxiety, depression, speech disruption, adults who stutter
MeSH terms
Adult, Anxiety, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Psychometrics, Quality of Life, Social Support, Speech, Stuttering, Reproducibility of Results, Social Stigma

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