Self-efficacy and quality of life in adults who stutter
Abstract
Purpose Self-efficacy has emerged as a potential predictor of quality of life for adults who stutter. Research has focused primarily on the positive relationship self-efficacy has to treatment outcomes, but little is known about the relationship between self-efficacy and quality of life for adults who stutter. The purpose of this mixed- methods study is to determine the predictive value of self-efficacy and its relationship to quality of life for adults who stutter.Method The Self-Efficacy Scale for Adult Stutterers and the Overall Assessment of the Speaker's Experience with Stuttering were administered to 39 adults who stutter, aged 18- 77. Percentage of syllables stuttered was calculated from a conversational speech sample as a measure of stuttered speech frequency. Qualitative interviews with semi-structured probes were conducted with 10 adults and analyzed using thematic analysis to explore the lived experience of adults who stutter.Results Self-efficacy emerged as a strong positive predictor of quality of life for adults living with a stuttered speech disorder. Stuttered speech frequency was a moderate negative predictor of self-efficacy. Major qualitative themes identified from the interviews with the participants were: encumbrance, self-concept, confidence, acceptance, life-long journey, treatment, and support.Conclusion Results provide clarity on the predictive value of self-efficacy and its relationship to quality of life and stuttered speech frequency. Findings highlight that the unique life experiences of adults who stutter require a multidimensional approach to the assessment and treatment of stuttered speech disorders.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Anxiety in speaking situations can be considered as an outcome of the negative consequences AWS experiences across the life span.
“Hence, anxiety in speaking situations can be considered as an outcome of the negative consequences AWS experiences across the life span.[1]”
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 48 · Cited by 55
- Authors
- Carter, A., Breen, L., Yaruss, J. S., & Beilby, J.
- Affiliations
- Curtin University (AU)
- Michigan State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Beilby, Janet
- Venue
- Journal of Fluency Disorders
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-12
- Volume
- 54
- Pages
- 14-23
- ISSN
- 0094-730X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2758942818
- Cited by
- 55
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3
- FWCI
- 4.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Fluency Disorders (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- eSpace (Curtin University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Stuttering Research and Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Voice and Speech Disorders
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Keywords
- stuttering, self-efficacy, quality of life, adults who stutter, lived experience, self-concept, acceptance, support
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Communication, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Self Concept, Speech, Speech Disorders, Stuttering, Self Efficacy, Qualitative Research
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