\““
if
I ‘ I
\

HI

I
l n
I

I   ‘ ‘
M  ‘ ‘\

¥
|

I a "I N ‘
1‘ M ‘

‘\ H |{ ‘t :1
H W V‘ ‘ ‘
!‘| '1‘ Hi ‘ l

i“
l

l
|

H‘
l
\
L‘
1
I

\]_s
N-b-
00b

 

A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHWS BENNEEN
EEQTEHSQHAL ZBEFENI’E'ISN 03‘ SE'QE‘E‘E’RENG ANifi
ATTF‘EUQE TOWAEU) S'I'Li'fiiikifl‘fi AS
MAMFEETEB? flY SQME GRADE SC 4G0 'YEACHERS

Thesis ‘Em' éfiw Emma: 99 3%. A...
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
Lannie Lave? Emmick
1959

¥ug§mxnnmnm,__ " ' “ "“ 2.“

 

A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN EXTENSIONAL DEFINITION
OF STUTTERING AND ATTITUDE TOWARD STUTTERING AS

MANIFESTED BY SOME GRADE SCHOOL TEACHERS

By

Lonnie Levet Emerick

A THESIS

Submitted to the College of Communication Arts
Michigan State University of Agriculture and
Applied Science in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Speech
l959

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author wishes to express his gratitude to the
chairman of his guidance committee, Dr. Ralph R. Leutenegger,
for his aid and continual interest in this study. A special
appreciation is directed to Dr. David Berlo who frustrated
the author into the original organizing of the study, as
well as motivated him to carry out the research.

For their part in serving as "bait" in the form of
a panel on the subject of stuttering, the author is indebted
to Norman Eastman, Andrew Cambell, Bernard Thurston, Richard
Mitchell, Bud McDougall and Alan Metheny.

A very special kind of appreciation is expressed to
Lynn McGlothlin Emerick whose personal and professional

support made this study possible.

ii

A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN EXTENSIONAL DEFINITION
OF STUTTERING AND ATTITUDE TOWARD STUTTERING AS

MANIFESTED BY SOME GRADE SCHOOL TEACHERS

By

Lonnie Levet Emerick

AN ABSTRACT

Submitted to the College of Communication Arts
Michigan State University of Agriculture and
Applied Science in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Speech

Year l959

I

"i Q ‘fv/f‘
APPFOVed “fifbe:f & Kl/KJ MLL_ {JI'*‘~
i

w ‘ l If

 

l. .
L“ A” /

ABSTRACT

The individuals we call stutterers do not stutter on
every word they speak. Much research directed toward an
understanding of stutterers has pointed up the impressive
variability of "moments of stuttering". Rather than being
a constant condition, stuttering, especially at the time of
"onset", represents a kind of relationship between speaker
and listener. The purpose of this study was to evaluate
the relationships between listeners' attitudes toward stutt-
ering and the relative amount of speech phenomena perceived
as "moments of stuttering" by these listeners.

Increments of speech pathology training appears to
be associated with a tendency to judge abnormal speech more
severely. With specific reference to stuttering, judges
trained in speech pathology count more "moments of stutter-
ing" in a given passage of speech than do lay judges.

Speech pathology training also appears to be associated
with a more tolerant attitude toward stuttering. Although
speech pathologists count more stutterings in a given sam-
ple of speech than do lay judges, speech pathologists have
"better" attitudes toward stuttering than do the lay indivi-
duals.

Attitude toward stuttering, and extensional defini-

tion of stuttering (countings of stutterings) appear to

stand in positively correlated relationship to one another.

iv

This was the hypothesis tested in this study: the greater
the number of "moments of stuttering" designated by the lis-
tener, the more favorable will be his attitude toward stutter-
ing.

A total of l48 elementary school teachers served as
the subjects for this study. These subjects answered a
Questionnaire, the lgwg Attitude‘lgst Toward Stuttering,
and counted stutterings in a 3% minute tape recorded passage
of the Speech of a stutterer. The median number of stutter-
ings counted was 30. The range extended from 8 to 87. The
range of the subjects' attitude scores on the attflude scale
toward stuttering extended from a low of l.04 to a high of
2.47.

The results of this study indicate a positive rela-
tionship between extensional definition (countings) of stutt-
ering and attitude toward stuttering (X2 equals 35.88; 2
degrees of freedom). That is, a group of judges manifest-
ing "good" attitudes toward stuttering will tend to count
more "moments of stuttering" in a given sample of Speech
than will a group of judges manifesting "poor" attitudes
toward stuttering.

Training in speech correction, as represented by the
judges employed in this study, tends to sensitize an indi-
vidual's perception of moments of stuttering. Sophisticated
judges (subjects who had taken formal college course work
in speech correction) counted significantly more stutterings

than did naive judges (X2 equals l0.83; I degree of freedom).

Sophisticated subjects not only counted significantly more
moments of stuttering than did naive subjects, they also
manifested significantly "better" attitudes toward stutt-
ering (X2 equals 27.28; 2 degrees of freedom).

The independent variables of parental status, age
of subjects' children, grade level taught by subjects and
career plans of subjects were not related to the dependent
variables of attitude toward stuttering and extensional

definition of stuttering.

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE

I. IntrOdUCtion. O O O I O O O O O O O O O 0 O O I

Hypotheses. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 9
11. Subjects, Materials and Procedure . . . . . . l0
SUb‘jeCts. O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O 0 O 0 '0

Materials 0 O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O l'

Procedure and Treatment of Data . . . . . . . l2
III. ReSU'tS O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O '7
Order of Presentation . . . . . . . . . . . . l7

Extensional Definition of Stuttering and

Attitude Toward Stuttering. . . . . . . . . l8

Naive versus Sophisticate . . . . . . . . . . '9
Marital Status. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Children versus No Children . . . . . . . . . 22

Age of Child. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Grade Level Taught. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Career Plans. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

IV. Discussion and Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . 25
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

vii

TABLE

II.

III.

IV.

LIST OF TABLES

PAGE

Distribution of the obtained and expected fre-
quencies of the measures representing extensional
definition of stuttering for all subjects accord-

ing to order of presentation of the experimental
materials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l8

Distribution of the obtained and expected fre-
quencies of measures representing extensional
definition of stuttering for all subjects

according to attitude category . . . . . . . . . . i9

Distribution of the obtained and expected fre-
quencies of measures representing extensional
definition of stuttering by naive and sophis-

ticate subjects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Distribution of the obtained and expected fre—
quencies of measures representing attitude

toward stuttering by naive and sephisticate

subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2|

viii

M -144- L— . *‘A--‘.
. “

l a-
re -— . ‘
M ev.-- - ;_ - V.
__,_.,.4

‘ x . 5. - .
‘ #44‘u‘._tt'___fii.r.I—D'V<

.- I ‘ .
- ‘-_:—-'_' rw—Af—-' ‘vh- .

"w- ;

quJ-th ; 4.5.3..

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Much research dealing with the speech disorder we call

stuttering has been directed toward an understanding of stut-

terers, and to a lesser degree, stutterers' listeners. When

stuttering began to receive intensive study in these direc-

tions, its impressive variability came more and more into the

center of attention.

The individuals we call stutterers do not stutter on

every word they speak. Stutterers report that the relative

amount of stuttering they do varies from situation to situa-

Consequently, the problem of stuttering may be regard-
" rather than

tion.i
ed in terms of recurring "moments of stuttering,

a more or less constant condition.

The problem of stuttering might be approached
fruitfully by concentrating on the moment of
stuttering--that is to say, by dealing with
the problem of stuttering as a series of
stutterings, by regarding it crucially not as
a more or less constant condition, but as in-

termittent responses.2

The listenerfs perception of stuttering also tends to

vary from situation to situation.3 Rather than being a constant

 

'0. Bloodstein, "A rating scale study of conditions
under which stuttering is reduced or absent," Journal of

Speech and Hgaring Disorders. l5 (l950), 29-36.

. 2W. Johnson, (Ed.) Stutteringgin Children and Adults.
(Minneapolis, Minn.: Minnesota Press, I955 p. I}.

3C. Tuthill, "A quantitative study of extensional

 

 

condition of either speaker or listener, stuttering, especially
at the time of "onset," represents a kind of relationship be-
tween speaker and listener.

In order to understand the onset of stuttering we

must appreciate the apparent dependable fact that

the word stuttering, employed with comprehensive

validity, refers not simply to some aspect or

other of speech, but rather to a certain kind of

relationship between a speaker and one or more

listeners.4

Stuttering may be viewed as a perceptual relationship,
or set of relationships,between a speaker and one or more
listeners. If we accept the premise that listeners are
more or less different from one another, then the relative
amount of speech phenomena perceived as ”moments of stut-
tering" will tend to vary from listeher to listener.

Two empirical studies directly relevant to this pro-
blem are those by Tuthill and Boehmler. Tuthiil5 asked
three groups of judges--speech pathologists, stutterers, and
a group of laymen--to count the number of stutterings in a

passage of recorded speech. Two-hundred and nineteen dif-

ferent items were marked as moments of stuttering. Only 39

meaning with special reference to stuttering," Sgeech Mono-

R. Boehmler, "A quantitative study of the extensional defini-
tion of stuttering with special reference to the audible de-
signate," (PhD dissertation, State University of Iowa, l953).

4
W. Johnson, Handbook 21 8 eech Patholo . Travis,
L., Ed. (New York: IppleTon-Cen ury and Crofts, l957) p. 909.

5c. Tuthiil, op. cit.

items were marked in common by 75% of the judges; only 4
items were marked in common by 90% of the judges. The
agreement within the group of speech pathologists was no
greater than that within the group of lay judges. it was
noted, however, that persons acquainted with stuttering
(i.e., speech pathologists and stutterers) counted signifi-
cantly more moments of stuttering than did the lay judges.
Normal speaking laymen were apparently not particularly in-
terested in stuttering and did not listen as keenly to the
speech of stutterers as did the stutterers themselves, or
the speech pathologists.

The second and more recent of the two investigations
is a study by Boehmler,6 which essentially duplicated the
findings of the Tuthill study. Boehmler developed a record-
ing of 600 short speech samples, each of which was judged to
contain one nonfluency. Three-hundred of the samples were
supplied by stutterers, 300 by non-stutterers. Three groups
of judges were asked to count the number of stutterings in
each of these samples. Two groups of judges were made up
of speech pathologists trained at different universities;
the remaining group consisted of lay individuals. The two
groups of judges trained in speech pathology applied the label
of stuttering to "moments of nonfluency" significantly more
‘frequently than did the group of lay judges.

k

6R. Boehmler, op. cit.

The Boehmler and Tuthill studies are the only empirical
investigations, known to this experimenter, that are concerned
with the extensional definition of stuttering, i.e., defining
stuttering by "pointing to it," or demonstrating examples of
it. There are, however, a few studies in other areas of
speech pathology in which investigators concerned themselves
with the variability of perceptions or evaluations of speech
abnormalities among several listeners.

Webb7 found that trained and experienced speech patho-
logists gave significantly more "severe" ratings than did
naive judges when judging nasality in the recorded Speech
of an individual with a cleft palate. An investigation by
Perrin8 studies the "severity" of articulatory disorders as
judged by speech pathologists and laymen. This study, however,
failed to show a significant difference between trained and
untrained listeners.

A tenable generalization that one could draw from the
available data is that increments of speech pathology train-
ing appear to be associated with a tendency to judge abnormal
speech more severely. With specific reference to stuttering,

judges trained in speech pathology count more "moments of

 

7C. Webb, "Selected variables in nasality judgement,"
(unpublished Ph.D dissertation, Pennsylvania State University,
I957 .

8E. Perrin, "Rating of defective speech by trained and
untrained observers," Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders.

stuttering" in a given passage of speech than do lay judges.
This observed difference in extensional definition is probably
due to the speech pathologists' "reaction sensitivity" to
speech breakdowns, which is described by Cameron as:

. . . a selective readiness to react to certain
components of a situation and not others, which
is the result of one's having acquired a system
of related attitudes and responses.

The individual trained in speech pathology has acquired spec-
ial reactions, which, in relation to certain situations, gives
the excitants of these reactions prepotence when such situa-
tions arise.

Speech pathology training also appears to be associated
with a more tolerant attitude toward abnormal speech phenomena.
Johnson'O found, in the development of the Iowa Attitude Tgst
Toward Stuttering, that:

The numerical score it (the attitudes scale) yields
throws some light on the respondents' attitude to-
ward stuttering, specifically how tolerant or in-
tolerant he is of stuttering. The scale's degree
of validity was demonstrated by the results ob-
tained when it was administered to four different
groups of peOple having various kinds and amounts
of experience with stuttering. (Stutterers, Speech
clinicians, university freshman and townspeople)
The mean scores were found to differentiate the
groups, with the clinicians showing the least
unfavorable reaction to stuttering, freshmen and

 

9N. Cameron, The Psychology of Behavior Disorders.
(Cambridge, Massachusetts: Houghton and leflin, l955) p. 66.

IOW. Johnson, F. Darley, and D. Spriestersbach, Diag-
nostic Manual in Speech Correction. (New York: Harpers
and Bros., l952).

stutterers a moderate reactionI and townspeople
the most unfavorable reaction.

It is obvious, therefore, that although speech patho-
logists count more stutterings in a given sample of speech
than do the lay judges, speech pathologists have "better"
attitudes toward stuttering than do the lay individuals.

It would appear that attitude toward stuttering is
positively related to extensional definition of stuttering.
This does not necessarily imply a causal relationship be-
tween the variables of extensional definition of stuttering
and attitude toward stuttering. It suggests that a group of
judges scoring in the "good" range on the attitude scale will
count more stutterings in a given passage of speech than will
another group of judges scoring in the "poor" range on the
attitude scale. Common sense would tend to lead us to assume
the reverse relationship, viz., individuals with "poor" atti-
tudes toward stuttering will count more stutterings in a given
sample of speech than will individuals with "good" attitudes.
However, an inspection of the data related to the proposed
hypothesis of positive correlation would tend to negate the
plausibility of the common sense viewpoint just presented.

It has been demonstrated that listener behavior is

depressed when communicating with stutterers.l2 This depression

”Ibid, p. i37.

l2A. Rosenberg and J. Curtis, "The effects of stutter-
ing on the behavior of the listener," Journal of Abnormal and

Social Psychology. 49 (i954), pp. 3557360.

is manifested in reduced bodily activity, as well as reduc-
tion in the amount of conversation. In effect stuttering
tends to act as a noxious stimulus.- It would not be un-
reasonable to postulate an effect on the perceptual process
as a result of the observed depression. Research concerned
with the phenomenon of perceptual defense has demonstrated
the validity of this postulate.l3 Such studies vividly
demonstrate the phenomenon of perceptual filtering, i.e.,

the differential recognition rate of unpleasant, neutral,

and pleasant stimuli. Unpleasant stimuli are not recognized
as rapidly as neutral or pleasant stimuli. Even when an indi-
vidual is required to react to a highly structured situation,
the defensive flight is operative.‘4 Speech pathology train-
ing would not only sensitize one to certain abnormal speech
phenomena, it would also tend to delimit whatever negative
evaluations an individual might have had prior to such train—

ing.

 

l3V. Glaudin, "Speed and visual recognition of Opera-
tionally defined primitive, social and neutral printed words
in so-called criminal psychopaths, neurotics, and normal in-
dividuals," (unpublished Ph.D dissertation, University of
Illinois, l954).

E. McGinnis, "Emotionality and perceptual defense,"
Esych Review. 56 (I949) pp. 244-25],

l4F. C00per, Public_gpinlon and Prgpaganda. Katz,
Cartwright, et al, Ed. (New‘Vork: :Dryden Press, I954), pp.

3|9-3l9.

It has been demonstrated that negative attitudes
toward ethnic and racial groups can be significantly altered
by acquired knowledge concerning the groups so evaluated.l5
Formal course work, selected readings, or personal contact
with negatively evaluated racial groups have been shown to
decrease the intensity of the negative attitudes.

Similarly, when an individual receives information
concerning stuttering, a change, in the positive direction,
would be expected in the individual's attitude toward stutt-
ering. No studies have been done prior to the current one
pertinent to this specific problem. The credence of the
proposed hypothesis is suggested, however, in the Darley
study'6 of parental attitudes. The mothers in Darley's
experimental group (mothers of stutterers) rated their chil-
dren's speech more severely than did the fathers. However,
on the Iowa Scale of attitude Toward Stuttering, the fathers
of the stuttering children, as a group, appeared to have a

less tolerant attitude toward stuttering than did the mothers.

 

l5H. Remmers, "Further studies in attitude," Series
III-Studies in Higher Education. 34 (l938), pp. l-2 .

A. Rose, §1udies in th£_Reduction of Propa anda.
(Chicago: American Council on Race Relations, l9E7i

F. Smith, "An experiment in modifying attitudes
toward the Negro," (unpublished Ph.D dissenatlon, Columbia
University, l943).

M. Smith, "A study in change of attitude toward the
Negro," ggurnal of Nggro Education. 8 (l939) pp. l4-70.

'5F. Darley, Stuttering in Children and Adults, John-
son, Ed. (Minneapolis: annesota Press, T955), chapter 4.

Hypotheses

Attitude toward stuttering, and extensional defini-
tion of stuttering (counts of stuttering) would appear to
stand in a positively correlated relationship to one another.
This, then, is the theoretic hypothesis to be tested in this
study: The greater the number of "moments of stuttering"
designated by the listener, the more favorable will be his
attitude toward stuttering.

This study represents an initial attempt in the study
of the relationships between countings of stutterings and
attitude toward stuttering. It was thought wise, therefore,
to evaluate the possible effects of certain independent vari-
ables upon the dependent variables of attitude and countings
of stutterings.

Parents of young children and teachers of the early
elementary grades usually are exposed more to the character-
istically nonfluent speech of younger children than are child-
less married couples and teachers of the upper elementary
grades respectively. Therefore, these two groups of married
couples and these two groups of teachers will be compared on
the attitude and stuttering-count continua. In addition it
was further felt that teachers who plan to teach as a per-
manent career might tend to be more sensitive to speech break-
downs of their pupils than would individuals who are teaching
on a temporary basis. Accordingly these two groups, "perman-

ent career teachers" and "temporary basis teachers", will also

be compared in the same fashion as the groups above.

CHAPTER II

SUBJECTS. MATERIALS AND PROCEDURE

Subjects

Elementary school teachers were selected as the
empirical population for this study. An elementary teacher
is defined as a person who teaches one or more of the grades
kindergarten through sixth grade. Elementary school teachers
were selected because they are exposed to a wide range of
children's speech behavior. For this reason, and for the
additional reason that a large majority of elementary school
teachers consider themselves inadequately trained to deal
with the problem of stuttering, this particular population
was selected.'7

The actual sampling was performed on the sub-popula-
tion of elementary school teachers in the vicinity of Lansing,
Michigan. A total of l48 subjects, l27 females and 2| males,
participated in the experiment. Forty-nine of the subjects

were currently enrolled in a formal Michigan State University

 

'78. Ainsworth and G. Lloyd, "The classroom teachers
activities and attitudes relating to speech correction,"
Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders. l9 (l954), pp. 244-249.

T. Knudson, "A study of the oral recitation pro-
blems of stutterers," Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders.
4 (I939). pp. 235-239.

lO

class designated as Speech 470, "Speech Correction for the
Classroom Teacher." At the time of the experiment, however,
no materials pertaining to the problem of stuttering had
been discussed. A number of individuals in this class were
undergraduate students and therefore were not included in
the experiment. The remainder of the subjects took part

in the experiment at Jackson and Dearborn, Michigan.

Materials

The Johnson-Ammons Tgst of Attitude loward Stuttering'8

was selected to measure the subjects' attitudes toward stutt-

 

ering. The attitude scale reaponses will be grouped into
three exclusive and exhaustive categories: l.OO to l.49 will
represent the "good" range; i.50 to l.99 will represent the
"moderate" range; and 2.00 to 2.44 will represent the "poor"
attitude range. A copy of the attitude scale, a one page
questionnaire and a blank sheet of paper for counting stutt-
erings were stapled together. (See Appendix I).

A three and one-half minute tape recording, consisting
of the oral reading of an individual who considers himself a
stutterer, served as the stimulus material for all subjects.
A passage from Thoreau's Walden was used for the reading

material.

 

l8W. Johnson and R. Ammons, "Studies in the psychology
of stuttering: XVIII. The construction and application of
a test of attitude toward stuttering," Journal of Speech Dis-
orders. 9 (l944), pp. 39-49.

i2

A standardized introduction was developed in an
attempt to mask the purpose of the experiment. This intro-

duction (see Appendix II) was used throughout the experiment.
Procedure and Treatment of Data

All of the subjects volunteered to participate in
this study. In return for their cooperation, a panel dis-
cussion program concerned with the tapic of stuttering was
presented by the author and a group of stutterers. This
program always tookpxace.g££g£ the experiment had been com-
pleted.

The data were gathered from several small groups of
subjects, 40, 32, 44, and 38 respectively. The experiment
was carried out in well lighted school rooms. Before the
start of the experiment it was determined that all subjects
could hear the tape recorder.

The order of presentation of the tape recording and
the attitude scale was systematically balanced. This was
done to delete possible bias error due to the order of pre-
sentation of the materials. Consequently, approximately one-
half of the subjects reacted to the tape recording first and
to the attitude scale second. The remaining subjects re-
acted to the attitude scale first and to the tape recording
second.

The specific null hypothesis to be tested in this

study is: There is no relationship between the variables

l3

of countings of stutterings and attitude toward stuttering;
these variables are independent.

If the results of the statistical analysis will
allow for rejection of the null hypothesis, inferences will
be drawn to one of the following alternate hypotheses:

There is a relationship between the variables of countings

of stutterings and attitude toward stuttering; attitude to-
ward stuttering and countings of stutterings are positively
correlated; or attitude toward stuttering and countings of

stuttering are negatively correlated.

It was decided that if treatment of the data reveals
a statistically significant positive correlation between the
dependent variables of countings of stuttering and attitude
toward stuttering, a number of additional statistical analyses
will be made. This will be done to test the possible effects
of certain independent variables upon the dependent variables
of countings of stuttering and attitude toward stuttering.
These independent variables are presented below.

i. What effect will a formal college course in speech
correction have on the subjects' countings of stuttering and
attitudes toward stuttering? To test the possible effects
of this variable the subjects will be divided into two ex-
clusive and exhaustive categories:

a) Those elementary school teachers who have
not taken a formal college course in speech correction will

be designated naive.

l4

b) Those elementary school teachers who have
taken one or more formal college courses in speech correc-
tion will be designated sophisticates.

2. What effect will marital status have on the sub-
jects' countings of stuttering and attitudes toward stutter-
ing? To test the possible effects of this variable, the
subjects will be divided into two exclusive and exhaustive
categories: single or married.

3. What effect will the presence or absence of chil-
dren in the family have on the subjects' countings of stutt-
ering and attitudes toward stuttering? An additional test
will be made by dividing those subjects who do have chil-
dren into two exclusive and exhaustive categories: those
subjects who have children under four years of age, and those
subjects who have children over four years of age.

4. What effect will "grade level taught" have on the
subjects' countings of stuttering and attitudes toward stutt-
ering? To test the possible effects of this variable, the
subjects will be divided into two exclusive and exhaustive
categories: those subjects who teach kindergarten through
third grade, and those subjects who teach fourth through
sixth grade.

5. What effect will "career plans" have on the sub-
jects' countings of stuttering and attitudes toward stuttering?
To test the possible effects of this variable, the subjects

will be divided into two exclusive and exhaustive categories:

l5

those subjects who consider teaching a permanent career,
and those subjects who consider teaching a temporary posi-
tion.

The median test‘9 was chosen as the statistical test
for this study. The median test was chosen because the
scores under study are frequencies in discrete categories.

A median countings of stutterings will be determined for

the sample of subjects. Each individual subject's count

of stutterings will then be treated in the following manner:
if the number of stutterings counted is larger than the med-
ian, it will be replaced by a plus; if the number counted is
less than the median, it will be replaced by a minus. The
resulting dichotomous sets of scores will then be cast into
a k x r contingency table. Those scores at the median will
be distributed equally above and below the common median.
The numbers in the body of the table will represent the
frequencies of pluses and minuses in each of k categories.
The eXpected frequencies will be found by dividing the column
marginal totals by one-half.

Once the data are categorized as plus or minus with
respect to the common median, and the resulting frequencies

have been cast into a k x r table, the Chi Square test of

 

'93. Siegal, Nonparametric Statistics for Behavioral
Sciences, (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., l9567 p. 22.

l6

independence will be performed. The Chi Square test of
significance will be determined by the following formula:20
74“: “£ng The resulting Chi Square, computed by the form-
ula above, has a sampling distribution which is approximated
by the Chi Square distribution with degrees of freedom equal
to k-l. In those instances where the degrees of freedom are
equal to one, the following formula, corrected for continuity,
will be used:2| 11“ (TEL-Lg)1

The relationship of girtain independent variables to
the dependent variable of attitude toward stuttering was

tested by the Chi Square test of independence. In these in-

stances the median test was not applicable. The following
a
(3:22 11: < (f%:i€.)

S
The 5 percent level of confidence (two-tailed test)

formula was use

was selected as the cutting point for consideration of values
obtained as significant.

The attitude scale responses will be grouped into
three exclusive and exhaustive categories: l.00 to l.49
will represent the "good" range; l.50 to l.99 will represent
the "moderate" attitude range; and 2.00 to 2.44 will represent

the "poor" attitude range.

2OF. Cornell, The Essentials of Educational Statis-
tics. (New York: John WTley and Sons, Inc., l956T‘p. l96.

2'Ibid, p. 2l0.

22Ibid, p. I96.

CHAPTER III
RESULTS

The range of the subjects' countings of stutterings
extended from a low of 8 to a high of 87. The median was
30. According to their particular countings of stutterings,
the subjects were divided into two groups: those subjects
above the median score for the combined groups and those
subjects below the median. Four subjects‘ countings of
stutterings were at the median; these "scores" were divided
equally into the groups above and below the median. In-
cluding these four scores, 74 subjects counted more stutt-
erings than the median; 74 subjects counted less than the
median.

The range of the subjects' attitude scores on the
Iowa Scale of Attitude Toward Stuttering extended from a
low of l.04 ("good" attitude) to a high of 2.47 ("poor"
attitude).

Order of Presentation

The data relating to the order of presentation of
materials is summarized in Table l. The subjects reacted
to the experimental situation in the following order:
eighty subjects answered the attitude scale first and then

counted stutterings; these tasks were performed in the

l7

l8

opposite order by the remaining sixty eight subjects.

According to the statistical

nit
tween the two groups waslsignificant (X2 equals .42.).

TABLE l

analysis the difference be-

DISTRIBUTION OF THE OBTAINED AND EXPECTED FREQUENCIES
OF THE MEASURES REPRESENTING EXTENSIONAL DEFDIHION

OF STUTTERING FOR

ORDER OF

ALL SUBJECTS ACCORDING TO

PRESENTATION OF THE
EXPERIMENTAL MATERIALS

Order of Presentation of Materials

 

l

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attitude scale- Tape recording, Total;
Tape recording Attitude scale
INumber of subjects IT
whose count of moments it 32 74
of stuttering exceeded (40) (34)
the common median num-
ber of stutterings W
Number of subjects 1
whose count of moments 38 36 74
of stuttering was less (40) (34)
than the common mediahh
number of moments of
stuttering
Totals 80 68 l48
df=l x2=.4g P>.05
Extensionai Definition of Stuttering
and Attitude Toward Stuttering
The data relating attitude to extensional definition

are summarized in Table

2.

The obtained x2 value of 38.08

with two degrees of freedom indicates, beyond the .05 level

of confidence, that the relationship between attitude and

l9

extensional definition is not due to change. Therefore,
the null hypothesis is rejected at the .05 level. In-
spection of the individual cells of Table 2 indicates a
positive relationship between attitude and extensional

definition.

TABLE 2

DISTRIBUTION OF OBTAINED AND EXPECTED FREQUENCIES OF
MEASURES REPRESENTING EXTENSIONAL DEFINITION
OF STUTTERING'FOR“ALL.SUBJECTS ACCORDING
TO ATTITUDE CATEGORY

 

Attitude
e " e a " e e " o IOEaI

 

umber of subjects
hose count of mo-
ents of stuttering 4. 24 9 74
exceeded the common (25)* (27.5) (2l.5)
edian number of mo-
ents of stuttering
cud—e-a-C-vnoccananu bu- ------ ---‘3"-CID-dull----IO-u-C-OQQQD-PCDQCDO-
umber of subjects
hose count of mo-
ents of stuttering 9 3| 34 74
as less than the (25) (27.5) (21,5)
common median num-
ber of moments of
tuttering

| Total 50 55 43 I48

x2 = 35.88 df = 2 P<.05
*Numbers in parentheses represent the expected frequencies.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Naive versus Sophisticate

0f the total number of l48 subjects: 47 subjects re-

ported that they had taken formal college course work in

20

speech correction; l0l subjects reported that they had not
taken formal college course work in speech correCtion.

A comparison of the extensional definitions of
stuttering for these two groups yielded the following differ-
ence: the sephistlcate group of subjects counted signifi-
cantly more stutterings than did the naive group of sub-
jects. The obtained x2 value of l0.39 with one degree of
freedom was significant beyond the .05 level. The results

are summarized in Table 3.

TABLE 3

DISTRIBUTION OF OBTAINED AND EXPECTED FREQUENCIES OF
MEASURES REPRESENTING EXTENSIONAL DEFINITIONS OF
STUTTERING BY NAIVE AND SOPHISTICATE SUBJECTS

 
 
 
 
 

   

  

 

 

Sophisticates Naive Total
(took course in (no speech cor-
peech correction) rection work)
umber of subjects
hose count of mo-
ents of stuttering 4
xceeded the common (2335) (53'5) 7
edian number of mo- ° °
ents of stuttering
umber of subjects
ose count of mo-
ents of stuttering '4 6O 74
38 less than the (23.5) (50.5)
ommon median num-
er of moments of
tuttering
Total 47 l0l l48

 

 

 

 

x2: l0.30 df=l P<.05

2i

An analysis of the naive and sophisticate subjects'
responses to the attitude scale yielded a statistically
significant difference. The sophisticate subjects, as a
group, manifested a "better", i.e., more tolerant, attitude
toward stuttering than did the naive subjects. The obtain-
ed X2 value of 27.28 (df equals two) was significant beyond

the .05 level. The results are summarized in Table 4.

TABLE 4

DISTRIBUTION OF OBTAINED AND EXPECTED FREQUENCIES OF
MEASURES REPRESENTING ATTITUDE TOWARD STUTTERING
BY NAIVE AND SOPHISTICATE SUBJECTS

 
    
 

 

 

 

 

Attitude
T75. O---i.49 l. $«199 . --- .

Naive Subjects
(No speech cor- 20 47 34 l0l
rection work) (34)* (38) (29)
Sophisticates ~
(Took course 30 8 9 47
in SPEECH COF‘ ('6) (I7) ('4)
rection)

Total so 55 43 l48

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

x2 =.- 27.28 df = 2 P<.05
*The expggted frequencies were computed by the following

formula: {‘8 mid“;

 

23
Ibid, p. 2ll.

22
Marital Status

Of the total number of l48 subjects, 50 reported
that they were single and 98 reported that they were married.
A comparison of the countings of stutterings for these two
groups failed to yield a significant difference (X2 equals
l.32, one degree of freedom).

A comparison of the responses of the single and
married subjects to the attitude scale failed to yield a
significant difference (X2 equals .102, two degrees of free-
dom).

In this sample of subjects Chi-Square test results
provided no evidence of differences between the independent
variable of marital status and the dependent variables of

attitude toward stuttering and countings of stutterings.
Children Versus No Children

Of the total number of 98 married subjects, 72 re-
ported that they had one or more children and 26 reported
that they had no children. A comparison of the countings
of stutterings for these two groups failed to yield a signi-
ficant difference (X2 equals l.68, one degree of freedom).

A comparison of the responses of these two groups
of subjects to the attitude scale failed to yield a signifi-
cant differenCe(X2 equals .338, two degrees of freedom).

In this sample of subjects Chi Square test results

23

provided no evidence of differences between the independent
variable of "children versus no children" and the dependent
variables of attitude toward stuttering and countings of

stutterings.
Age of Child

Of the total number of 72 subjects who had children,
27 had children under four years of age and 45 subjects had
children over four years of age. A comparison of the count-
ings of stutterings for these two groups failed to yield a
significant difference (X2 equals .92, one degree of freedom).

A comparison of the responses of these two groups of
subjects to the attitude scale failed to yield a significant
difference (X2 equals .227, two degrees of freedom).

In this sample of subjects Chi Square test results
provided no evidence of differences between the independent
variable of "age of child" and the dependent variables of

attitude toward stuttering and countings of stutterings.
Grade Level Taught

Of the total number of l48 subjects, 79 reported
that they taught one of the grades kindergarten through
third; 69 reported that they taught one of the grades fourth
through sixth. A comparison of the countings of stutterings
for these two groups failed to yield a significant difference

(X2 equals .46, one degree of freedom).

24

A comparison of the responses of these two groups
of subjects to the attitude scale failed to yield a signifi-
cant difference (X2 equals l.O2, two degrees of freedom).

In this sample of subjects Chi Square test results
provided no evidence of differences between the independent
variable of "grade level taught" and the dependent variables

of attitude toward stuttering and countings of stutterings.
Career Plans

0f the total number of l48 subjects, 45 reported that
teaching, for them, was a temporary position. One-hundred
and three subjects reported that teaching, for them, was a
permanent career. A comparison of the countings of stutter-
ings for these two groups failed to yield a significant differ-
ence (X2 equals .408, one degree of freedom).

A comparison of the responses of these two groups of
subjects to the attitude scale failed to yield a significant
difference (X2 equals .838, two degrees of freedom).

In this sample of subjects Chi Square test results
provided no evidence of differences between the independent
variable of "career plans" and the dependent variables of

attitude toward stuttering and countings of stutterings.

CHAPTER IV

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study indicate a positive re-
lationship between counting of stutterings and attitude to-
ward stuttering. That is, a group of judges manifesting
"good" attitudes toward stuttering will tend to count more
"moments of stuttering" in a given sample of speech, than
will a group of judges manifesting "poor" attitudes toward
stuttering. This concomittance, however, does not establish
a causal relationship between counting of stutterings and
attitude toward stuttering. Statements of cause-effect re-
lationships between counting of stutterings and attitude
toward stuttering are contingent upon further investigation.

Research, for example, might be profitably directed
toward the following questions: Does a listener's attitude
toward stuttering determine the number of speech phenomena
he will label stuttering in a given passage of speech? Are
both attitude toward stuttering and counting of stutterings
determined by another variable or set of variables?

If attitude toward stuttering and counting of moments
of stutterings are causally related, a change in attitude
toward stuttering would be followed by a change in countings
of stutterings. Two grOUps of subjects with equivalent atti-
tudes toward stuttering could be asked to count moments of

stuttering. One of the groups could then be exposed to a

25

26

message designed to ameliorate attitude toward stuttering.
The two groups could then be asked to again count moments
of stuttering. An increase in countings of stutterings

for the group exposed to such a message would tend to vali-
date the causal relation between attitude toward stuttering
and counting of stutterings. Change in attitude toward
stuttering could also be tested and retested in this manner.

Similar research could determine the effects of
different kinds of messages on both attitude toward stuttering
and counting of stutterings. For example, would operation-
ally-defined "information" messages (messages designed to
increase knowledge about stuttering) change attitude and
subsequent counting of stutterings? The test-retest design,
as described above, could be used to evaluate the effects
of interpersonal contact with stutterers upon subjects'
attitudes and Countings of stutterings.

Training in speech correction, as represented by the
judges employed in this study, tends to sensitize an indivi-
dual's perception to moments of stuttering. Sophisticated
judges (subjects who had taken formal college course work
in speech correction) counted significantly more "stutterings"
than did naive judges. Furthermore, an individual's attitude

toward stuttering tends to "improve,"

i.e., become more tol-
erant, with training in speech correction. Sophisticated

subjects not only counted more "moments of stuttering" than
did naive subjects, they also manifested "better" attitudes

toward stuttering.

27

These results would indicate the wisdom of requiring
elementary teachers to take formal college course work in
speech correction. Similar benefit might be realized by
in-service training of the elementary school teacher by the
public school speech therapist or by encouraging interper-
sonal contact between elementary school teachers and indi-
viduals who stutter. The attitude of an elementary school
teacher might well determine whether or not a given child
will begin to stutter.

The following question was raised by subjects in
each of the groups tested: "How many stutterings are there
really on the tape?" Using an extensional definition of
stuttering (counting stutterings), the tape-recorded pass-
age used in this experiment apparently did not contain a
"real" number of stutterings. In terms of a physical defini-
tion of stuttering, however, there might be a "real" number
of stutterings in the tape recorded passage of speech. A
physical definition of stuttering might be operationally
defined in a number of ways. For example, a normal speaker
whose pitch and loudness variability were similar in nature
to the "normal" speech of the stutterer could read the same
passage recorded for this eXperlment. Both of these read-
ings could then be subjected to a visible speech analysis.
A moment of stuttering might be defined as certain observ-

able deviations between the two voice characteristics. A

28

similar physical definition might be derived from a PGSR

or polygraph device. Using these definitions the experi-
menter could determine the extent to which sophisticated
subjects and naive subjects deviated in their countings

from the "real" number of stutterings. It might be found,
for example, that sephisticated subjects' countings of stutt-
erings do not differ significantly from the "real" number of
stutterings. SOphisticate subjects, for instance, may be
realistic in their evaluation of abnormal speech. Naive
subjects, perhaps, due to a perceptual defense phenomenon,
might significantly "underperceive" in their countings of
stutterings.

It might be found, however, that both naive and
sophisticate subjects differ significantly in their count-.
ings from the "real" number of stutterings: sophisticates.
because they have a reaction sensitivity or "set", may signi-
ficantly "overperceive" abnormal speech phenomenon; naiVe
subjects, because of the possible "underperception" described
above, may want less Speech phenomenon-

On the basis of the findings of this study, recog-
nizing that limitations may exist due to the particular popu-
lation sample tested and the experimental conditions employed,
the following conclusions are drawn:

I. Attitude toward stuttering and counting "moments“
of stuttering" are positively related.

2. Training in speech correction has an ameliorative

29

effect upon attitude toward stuttering. Subjects trained
in speech correction manifested "better" attitudes toward
stuttering than did subjects not so trained.

3. Training in speech correction tends to "sensi-

tize one to 'moments of stuttering.'"

Subjects trained in
speech correction counted more moments of stuttering than
did subjects not so trained.

4. The independent variables of marital status,
parental status, age of subjects' children, grade level
taught and career plans are not related to the dependent
variables of attitude toward stuttering and extensional
definition of stuttering.

5. There age no "real" number of stutterings in
terms of a perceptual definition of stuttering; listener
attitude is related to the number of speech phenomena that
will be labeled as stuttering; the "better" one's attitude

is toward stuttering, the more "moments of stuttering" that

will be counted.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ainsworth, S. and Gretchen Lloyd, "The classroom teachers
activities and attitudes relating to speech correc-
tion, Journal of Speech and Hgaring Disorders. l9:
244-249, September, T954.

Bloodstein, 0., "A rating scale study of the conditions
under which stuttering is reduced," Journal of S eech
ago Hearing_Qisorders. l5: 29—36, February, T950.

Boehmler, R., "A quantitative study of the extensional de-
finition of stuttering with special reference to the
audible designate." Ph.D dissertation, State Uni-
versity of Iowa, l953.

Cameron, N., The Psychology of Behavior Disorders. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Houghton and Mifflin, l956.

Cornell, F., Essentials of Edgcational Statistics. New York:
John WiTEy and Sons, T956.

Glaudin, V., "Speed and visual recognition of operationally
defined primitive, social and neutral printed words
in so-called criminal psychopaths, neurotics, and
normal individuals." PhD dissertation, University of
~Illinois, l954.

Johnson, W., and Robert Ammons, "Studies in the psychology
of stuttering: XVIII. The construction and appli-
cation of a test of attitude toward stuttering,"
%Og£nal of Speech Disorders. 9: 39-49, February,

9 0

Johnson, W., F. Darley, and D. Spriestersbach, Diagnostic
Manual in Speech Correction. New York: Harpers and
Bros., l952.

Johnson, W. (editor), Stuttering in Childrgg and Adults.
Minneapolis, Minnesota: Minnesota Press, I95 .

Katz, E., D. Cartwright, et al, Public Opinion and Propaganda.
New York: Dryden Press, l954f

Knudson, T., "A study of the oral recitation problems of
stutters," Journal of Speech Disorders. 4: 235-239.
September, I939.

McGinnis, E., "Emotionality and Perceptual Defense," Psych
Review. 56: 244-25l, I949.

30

3i

Perrin, E., "Rating of defective speech by trained and un-
trained observers," Journal of Speech and Hearing
gisorders. l9: 48-5l, February, l954.

Remmers, H. H., "Further studies in Attitude," Series III-
Studies in Higher Education. 34: l-24, l9 .

Rose, A.M., Studies in the Reduction of Propaganda. Chicago:
American Council on Race RelatTons, l9 7.

Rosenberg, A. and J. Curtiss, "The effects of stuttering
on the behavior of the listener," Journal of Abnormal
and Social Psychology. 49: 355-360, l954.

Siegle, S., Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral
Sciences. New York: McGraw-HTIT Book Co., I956.

Smith, F. T., "An experiment in modifying attitudes toward
the Negro," PhD dissertation, Columbia University, l943.

Smith, M., "A study in change of attitude toward the negro,"
Journal of Negro Education. 8: l4-70, l939.

Travis, L. (editor), Handbook of Speech Pathology. New York:
Appleton-Century and Crofts, l957.

Tuthill, C., "A quantitative study of extensional meaning
with special reference to stuttering," _peech Monggrgphs.

Webb, C., "Selected variables in nasality judgement," PhD
dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, I957.

Willey, Norman, "A study of listener reactions to normal
versus stuttering speech," M.A. thesis, Indiana
University, l957.

APPENDIX

APPENDIX I

Purpose of the scale: This is not a test or a quiz. There
are no right or wrong answers. It is a scale of attitude
toward stuttering. In order to help stutterers, we must
know their attitude and the attitude of other people in con-
nection with stuttering. Please mark this questionnaire as
carefully as you can. We want to know your attitude. Don't

hesitate to put down what you believe.

Date Sex Marital status: Married Single

i. If married, do you have children?

a) under four years over four years

b) do any of them stfitter? under four years
over four years

 

2. Do any of your relatives stutter? yes no
3. With how many stutterers other than relatives have you
been acquainted?

4. Have you ever noticeably stuttered? yes no

5. Have you ever taken a course in Speech Correction?
yes no
a) postgraduate school undergraduate school

6. Is there a speech correction service in your school?
yes no

7. What grade level do you teach? (circle correct response):
K-i-2-3-4-5-6

8. How long have you taught at this grade level?

 

9. How long have you taught all together?

 

l0. Do you plan on teaching as a: permanent career ; or
as a temporary position

 

Procedure: Now you are ready to begin marking the scale,

33

34

which begins at the top of the next page. In responding

to each item, you are to circle the response which best
reflects your own attitude. Work accurately and as rapidly
as possible. Don't spend a great deal of time analyzing
wording. Mark all statements. If you are not sure of

what your attitude is, mark the best guess and go on.

35

Remember: In responding to each item, circle the answer

which best reflects your own attitude.

If a person at the family dinner table is about to
stutter on a word, he should substitute another word
for it and go on.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
ioderately disagree Strongly disagree

When giving a talk before a group of friends, a person
should talk more slowly and prolong sounds in order to
put off saying words he thinks he is going to stutter on;
Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided

Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A stutterer should try out for the debating team.
Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A fellow should prefer to sit in silence rather than
stutter to a girl he is with at a party.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A husband who stutters whould try to have his wife ans-
wer the doorbell or telephone.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

If while introducing two friends, a person believes he
will stutter, he should prolong the final sound of the
preceding word or say "a-a-afi until he believes he can
get the word out.

If he feels he will stutter while doing so, a father
should avoid talking to his son about sex and marriage.
Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

If a girl goes for an auto ride with a young man she
likes and believes she will stutter, she should speak
as little as possible.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

When at a party you should talk as little as possible
if you are a stutterer.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

l0.

l2.

l4.

l7.

36

If she stutters, a girl should not apply for a position
as salesgirl in a department store.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A person should not be a Boy or Girl Scout leader if
he stutters.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

If you stutter, you should not prepare yourself to be
a salesman.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A person should be embarrassed if he stutters while
telling a casual, chance acquaintance about a book
he has read.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A stutterer should not volunteer to be class secretary.
Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

You should be embarrassed if you stutter while talking
before a school assembly.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A boy who stutters should not run for class or school
president.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

If you feel you are going to stutter when answering the
phone, you should try to boost up your courage by trying
to tell yourself you won't stutter.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided

Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

If one is telling a story at a party and thinks he is
going to stutter on a word he should try to find an
easier word to take its place.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

If a person believes he will stutter when applying at
a certain time for a job as a janitor, he should wait
until later to apply, when he believes his speech will
cause him less embarrassment.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

20.

2i.

22.

230

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

37

When visiting a friend's house for the evening and asked
what he would like to do or play, a stutterer should
choose a game where he would have little talking to do.
Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided

Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

Ifca-person stutters while talking in class, he should
talk more loudly and act more confidently.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A street car conductor should be embarrassed if he
stutters on the name of a street he is calling out.
Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A stuttering woman should avoid going into a store to
buy a hat if she believes the saleslady will feel sorry
for her or secretly laugh at her because of her stutter-
ing. -

Strongly agree ioderately agree Undecided

Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

If a person stutters while answering a question in class,
he should just stop and start over again.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided

Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A person should not try to tell jokes to a person of the
opposite sex if he is likely to stutter while doing so.
Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided

Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A girl should feel embarrassed if she stutters saying
her escort's name when introducing him to some of her
friends.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A stutterer should try to be hired for jobs requiring
little speaking-for example, janitor or wrapping clerk.
Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A salesgirl should be embarrassed if she stutters while
trying to sell an article.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A person should try to avoid leading a prayer at church
or Sunday school if be believes he will stutter.
Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

30.

3i.

32.

33.

34.

' 35.

36.

37.

38.

38

A stutterer should stay at home and listen to the radio
rather than go to a discussion group where he would
stutter if called on to Speak.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

If he feels he will stutter while asking a girl to go
with him to a party, a fellow should put off acking,
hoping that later on his speech will be more fluent.
Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

If he believes he will stutter, a husband should avoid
embarrassing his wife by talking while at a dinner given
by one of her close friends.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided

Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

At church, if a person believes he will stutter while
introducing friends, he should wait until some time
later when he feels less likely to stutter.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A salesgirl should be embarrassed if she stutters while
trying to sell a book to a man.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A teacher who stutters should conceal this by substi-
tuting easy words for the hard ones he feels he will
stutter on.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A stutterer should not plan to be a lawyer.
Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A wife who stutters should try to keep it from her hus-
band's notice by speaking slowly or prolonging sounds
until she thinks she can say her words better.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

If he stutters, a young man should not prepare himself
to be a salesman.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

39.

40.

4|.

42.

43.

44.

45.

39

A teacher generally should not call upon a stutterer
in his class for oral recitation.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A stutterer should not be a bus driver.
Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

If a person stutters in one of your classes, you should
feel sorry for him.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

If acquaintances come to visit the family, a stutterer
should leave the talking to them up to non-stuttering
members of the family.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

When asked at a party to choose between a game where
he will have to talk a good deal and one where he
could keep still, the stutterer should choose the one
where he could keep still.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A woman who stutters should avoid meeting and talking
with her husband's influential friends.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A barber who stutters should not stutter while giving
haircuts.

Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

40

APPENDIX II

INTRODUCTION USED TO THE GROUPS OF SUBJECTS

This is a study in the field of speech correction.
Your assistance in this project will aid us in our clinical
work. You will be asked to perform two tasks: listen to a
tape recording and count the number of stutterings that you
hear, and fill out a questionnaire and scale about stuttering.
There are, of course, no right or wrong answers to these ques-
tions. The tape you will hear was made by a young man who
considers himself to be a stutterer, and who has been clini-
cally diagnosed as a stutterer. You may start counting the
stutterings after the second click you will hear on the tape.
After we have listened to the tape, and counted the number of
stutterings on the blank page of the form, we will go on to
the questionnaire. Does anyone have a question? (Usually
someone asked the experimenter to define what he meant by
"stutterings." In this instance the instructions above were

repeated.)

 

 

4L4. /'
his. ‘0

, “UN 2 sissy «y
“' i~

 

 

 

 

 

IES

MMM