Cited by 34Stuttering Research and TreatmentMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

The Clinical Applications of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy with Clients Who Stutter

Palasik, Scott, Hannan, Jaime·2013·Perspectives on Fluency and Fluency Disorders

Abstract

The field of fluency disorders has used Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) techniques to help clients who stutter manage their thoughts about stuttering by engaging in cognitive restructuring activities. In the late ‘90s, a new form of cognitive therapy called Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) emerged, stemming from classic CBT and Relational Frame Theory (RFT). Though there is only one documented study in which ACT is used with clients who stutter, there is tremendous clinical potential to assist clients who stutter of all ages using the six core principles of ACT (contact with the present moment, acceptance, thought defusion, self as a context, defining values, and committed actions). The core principles encourage clients who stutter to live a values‐based life by assisting them in defusing adverse thoughts related to stuttering and choosing committed action behaviors and goals in accordance with their individual values through mindfulness practices. Participating in activities related to the core principles of ACT can help clients who stutter to become more psychologically flexible when managing their perceptions related to stuttering. Using ACT can further lead clients toward acceptance of all thoughts while learning to observe themselves in the present moment and make values‐based choices for future behaviors.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1044/ffd23.2.54

Cites

41 of 41 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?

  • Specific mind-body interventions including Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, and Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction have been examined as treatments to support people who stutter.

    “In recent years, specific mind–body interventions have been examined as treatments to support people who stutter, including Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) [20,21,22], Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) [14,22,23], and Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) [24,25,26,27].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Palasik, S., & Hannan, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Akron (US)
  • Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center (US)
Venue
Perspectives on Fluency and Fluency Disorders
Published
2013-11
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
54-69
ISSN
  • 1940-7599 (ISSN-L)
  • 1940-7602
OpenAlex
W2055500275
Cited by
34
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 2
FWCI
0.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Perspectives on Fluency and Fluency Disorders (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Akron
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Stuttering Research and Treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
acceptance and commitment therapy, stuttering, fluency disorders, relational frame theory, cognitive restructuring, acceptance, mindfulness, psychological flexibility, values-based action, committed action, cognitive behavioral therapy

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