University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Word Familiarity And Frequency Of Stuttering

(USC Thesis Other)

Word Familiarity And Frequency Of Stuttering

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content WORD FAMILIARITY AND FREQUENCY OF STUTTERING by Donna Jean Cooper A Dissertation Presented, to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Communicative Disorders) February 1972 INFORMATION TO USERS This dissertation was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking fro m the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into th e film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting th ru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete co n tin u ity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image o f the page in th e adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part o f th e material being photographed the photographer followed a d e fin ite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections w ith a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below th e first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual co n ten t is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 4S106 A Xerox Education Company 72-21,661 COOPER, Donna Jean, 1944- WORD FAMILIARITY AND FREQUENCY OF STUTTERING. University of Southern California, Ph.D., 1972 Speech Pathology University Microfilms, A XEROX Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan (£) Copyright by Donna Jean Cooper 1972 THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED. UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TH E G R A D U A TE S C H O O L U N IV E R S IT Y PARK LOS A N G ELES, C A L IF O R N IA 9 0 0 0 7 This dissertation, written by ......Dpnna..Jm.£oope_r................... under the direction of h$L... Dissertation Com mittee, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by The Gradu ate School, in partial fulfillment of require ments of the degree of D O C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y Dean D ate ?ebruary_.1972 .TION G Chain PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. University Microfilms, A Xerox Education Company r To Stephen ii I ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my professors at USC for all their help and guidance, particularly: Professor Perkins for his ideas and suggestions, which were of central impor tance to this research; Professor Haney for his support, encouragement and understanding over the past several years; Professor Curlee for his invaluable assistance in the shap ing and completion of this dissertation, and his ready availability for critical comment throughout the project; and Professor Michael who, in his kind and gentle way, ac complished the impossible in helping me to understand sta tistics . I would also like to thank Alice Saul, who good naturedly sat through hours of tapes with me. And last, but most certainly not least, I thank my parents who believed in me, my grandfather who waited so patiently, and my husband who did both. iii TABLE OP CONTENTS Page LIST OP TABLES vi Chapter I. THE PROBLEM 1 Introduction Statement of the Problem Questions and Hypotheses Importance of the Study II. REVIEW OP LITERATURE 5 Introduction Word Commonness Information Value Grammatical Function Word Length Word Position In Sentence Initial Sound Research Design Subjects Materials Experimental Procedures Evaluation Statistical Procedures Stuttering Supplementary Findings Inter-Judge Reliability Summary V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS .... 35 Summary Conclusions Implications REFERENCES....................................... 42 III. METHODS AND PROCEDURES 19 IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION iv I ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page APPENDIXES....................................... 45 APPENDIX A. Subjects1 Instructions ........... 47 B. Judges' Instructions ............. 49 C. Subjects1 Answer Sheet ........... 51 D. Word Inventories................. 53 E. Subjects1 Data................... 57 v LIST OP TABLES Table Page 1. Control of Variables for Word Matching and Sentence Construction .................... 20 2. Standardized Word Inventories Used......... 21 3. Statistical Procedures Employed in Analyses of the Data......... 24 4. Difference Between Stuttering Frequency on Familiar and on Unfamiliar Words....... 26 5. Difference Between Stuttering Frequency on Non-Test Words Before and After Test Words. . 29 6. Difference Between Stuttering Frequency on Non-Test Words in Never-Word-Sentences and in Frequently-Word-Sentences ......... 31 7. Difference Between Number of Never and Frequency Words Identified as Jonah Words.......................... 32 8. Judges' Agreement on Specific Words Stuttered.......................... 33 9. Summary of Findings........................ 34 vi CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Introduction Stuttering is not a random occurrence. It is con tingent upon certain variables; these variables contribute to the loci and frequency of stuttering. Among these are linguistic variables, situation variables, and stutterer variables. Several authorities (Brown, 1937* 19^5; Brown & Moran, 19^2; Quarrington, Conway, & Siegel, 1962; Hejna, 1963; Schlesinger, Porte, Pried, & Melkman, 1965; Schlesing- er, Melkman, & Levy, 1966; Taylor, 1966a, 1966b; Soderberg, 1962, 1966, 1967; Wingate, 1967* Bloodstein & Gantwerk, 1967; Silverman & Williams, 1967) have investigated linguis tic or word-dependent variables as precipitating agents for moments of stuttering and have concluded separately that there are certain linguistic factors that contribute to the frequency and loci of stuttering. Among these linguistic factors are: word length, grammatical function, word posi tion, initial phoneme (vowel/consonant), information value, word commonness. Authorities generally have agreed that stuttering occurs more frequently when information value is high (Tay lor, 1966a, 1966b; Soderberg, 1967). If information value 1 I — . . . . . ■ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i 2 is operationally defined as the ability to designate the word that will complete a sentence, it would seen that high information value would occur when words to be spoken are unfamiliar. Further, if linguistic planning or motor plan ning is a factor in stuttering, then it would also seem likely that word familiarity would have some relationship to the disfluency in initiating speech sounds; i.e., it would be more difficult to plan motorically for an unfamil iar word than for a familiar word (Wingate, 1966, 1967* Perkins, 1970). These linguistic explanations of stutter ing behavior have been posited both with and without the assumption that a predisposition of some kind is also essen tial to the occurrence of stuttering. A central construct among these explanations is that linguistic elements are intervening variables that are related to loci of stuttering. Word familiarity, another, but as yet untested linguistic variable, may also be re lated to loci of stuttering. Therefore, the following research hypothesis is deduced: word familiarity is a factor in determining loci and frequency of stuttering. Hejna (1963)* Schleslnger, Melkman, and Levy (1966), Soderberg (1966), and Wingate (1967) touched on this subject by studying the effects of common and uncommon words on the frequency of stuttering. However, they operationally de fined common and uncommon words in terms of the Thorndike- Lorge (1944), Rieger (1935)* or Bell Telephone Laboratories (Fletcher, 1935) word lists. Statement of the Problem The general purpose of this study will be to inves tigate word familiarity as a factor in determining loci and frequency of stuttering. This study will be unique in that word familiarity will be operationally defined in terms of the subject's (S's) selection of his own lists of familiar and unfamiliar words. Thus, the logic of this experimental design will be as follows: If a S selects his own lists of familiar and unfamiliar words, and if in subsequent reading samples the loci and frequency of the S's stuttering is affected by word familiarity, then word familiarity is indeed a factor in stuttering. Questions and Hypotheses Specifically, this study will be designed to answer the following question: Will the frequency and loci of stuttering be affected by word familiarity? The experimental hypotheses generated from this question were: 1. Significantly (p < ; .05) more stuttering will be observed on unfamiliar words than on familiar words. 4 2. Significantly (p ^..05) more stuttering will be observed on non-test words before test words than after test words. 3. Significantly (p <l .05) more stuttering will be observed on non-test words in never-word-sentences than in frequently-word-sentences. 4. A significant difference (p .05) will be observed between the number of never and frequently words identified as "Jonah" words. Importance of the Study Although many research projects have explored lin guistic parameters of speech as causal factors in precipi tating instances of stuttering, no research has been re ported that explored the relationship between a S's stutter ing and his familiarity with words read. Results from the proposed study should: (l) demonstrate the relationship between stuttering and word familiarity where each S se lects his own familiar and unfamiliar words; (2) provide data for prediction and control of stuttering moments; (3) yield Implications for further research. CHAPTER II REVIEW OP LITERATURE Introduction The purpose of this review will be to examine the literature pertinent to the linguistic or word-dependent variables— word commonness, Information value, grammatical function, word length, word position in sentence, initial sound— related to the occurrence of stuttering. The review will be divided into six sections, with one section for each of the above linguistic variables. Several of the studies discuss two or more of these vari ables simultaneously. When this occurs, the study will be reviewed once, and thereafter only briefly cited under the additional appropriate sections. Word Commonness Word commonness, or word frequency usage, has been investigated by several authorities. Hejna (1963) tested 14 college-age stutterers on a 50-word list. The list consisted of 25 commonly used nouns and 25 uncommonly used nouns, matched for length and begin ning syllable. (Hejna's selection of common and uncommon words was based on frequency of occurrence for each word as 5 6 stated in Thorndike-Lorge and in Bell Telephone Laboratory word lists.) He found "significantly less stuttering on the more commonly used nouns." Thus, Hejna hypothesized that this finding "suggests that an adaptation effect might take place in spontaneous speech." Soderberg (1966) tested 20 stutterers, age 12-44 years, on nine 10-word lists. The word lists were composed of three levels of word length and three levels of word frequency. He attempted to control for (l) stress of ini tial phoneme, (2) grammatical function, (3) initial sound of word. (Soderberg selected the common and uncommon words from the Thorndike-Lorge word lists.) He found signifi cantly more stuttering associated with increases in word length and decreases in word frequency. Schlesinger, Forte, Fried, and Melkman (1965) stu died the effects of transition probability (information value) and frequency of occurrence (word commonness) as factors related to stuttering. Ten stutterers, age 10-24 years, read a 184-word passage. Two judges analyzed these passages for instances of stuttering and found: that words of high transition probability (low information value) were stuttered one-half as often as were words of low transition probability; that significantly more stuttering occurred on words of low frequency; that the greatest amount of stutter ing occurred on words that had both low transition probabil ity and low frequencies of occurrence. (Their selection of 7 high and low frequency words was based on frequency of oc currence figures found in Rieger's lists of Hebrew words.) In another study, Schlesinger, Melkman, and Levy (1966) used 31 stutterers, age 8-l6 years, to investigate the effects of word length and word frequency on stutter ing. The Ss read 59 Hebrew,test words. These words were one-, two-, or three-syllable words of low, medium, or high frequency of occurrence. (Again, these frequency levels were based on Rieger's lists of Hebrew words.) They found significantly more stuttering on the longer and on the less frequent words. Wingate (1967) had 14 stutterers, age 16-36, read two lists of words: one list consisted of one-syllable word pairs, and the second list consisted of two-syllable words phonetically equivalent to the word pairs in the first list. The frequency of stuttering for common and uncommon two- syllable words was "practically identical." In contrast, considerably more stuttering occurred on single-syllable uncommon words than on common words of the same length. (Wingate's selection of common and uncommon words was based on frequency of occurrence for each word as stated in Thorn- dike-Lorge.) Wingate interpreted these results as indicat ing that "frequency of stuttering as a function of word familiarity is related to the factor of word length." Wingate also hypothesized that motor planning might be re lated to the higher incidence of stuttering on less familiar words. "It Is conceivable," he said, "that facility with which a word is spoken is affected by, among other things, how quickly the motor schema for that word is accessible." He then concluded that words of more than one-syllable are more difficult because "they require more complex pat terns of coordination . . . demanding motor planning for more intricate articulation, sound transition, and changes in stress, pitch, and volume." The results of these five studies indicate that word commonness (word frequency) and stuttering are directly related: as word commonness decreases, stuttering increases; conversely, as word commonness increases, stuttering de creases . Information Value Information value is operationally defined as the ability to predict the occurrence of a given word. Thus, a word of high information value is difficult to predict, and carries a high information load. A word of low information value is easily predicted, and carries a relatively low in formation load. To study the relationship between stuttering and information value, Quarrington (1965) asked 24 adult stut terers to read a 95-word prose passage. He then determined the frequency of stuttering on each word. The information value for each word was then estimated by studying the ex- tent to which 46 normal speakers could predict each word 9 from a knowledge of the preceding words. Quarrington found that both word position and information value are signifi cantly related to instances of stuttering. Specifically, he found that stuttering increases with words of greater information value and with words in earlier sentence posi tions . Schlesinger, Forte, Fried, and Melkman (1965) lis tened to the recorded passages of 10 stutterers, age 10-24 years, to study transition probability and frequency of oc currence as factors related to stuttering. They found that words of high transition probability (easily predicted words, or words that carried low information load) were stuttered one-half as often as were words of low transition probability. Taylor (1966a, 1966b) also examined the importance of information value to stuttering. Among other things, he found that words starting with consonants rather than vow els, words at earlier rather than later positions in sen tences, and longer rather than shorter words are those most likely to be stuttered. Since these conditions describe words of more rather than less uncertainty, Taylor hypothe sized that the "amount of information associated with each of these factors and articulatory complexities are possible underlying mechanisms of stuttering." Soderberg (1967) had 10 stutterers, age 9-44 years, record a l4l-word passage. He then identified and examined the instances of stuttering in the passages with respect to word classes, word information value, and word location in phonemic clauses. He found that stuttering and high infor mation value occurred more frequently on earlier words than on subsequent words. He concluded that stuttering tends to correspond directly to the increases and decreases in word information. Further, he stated that "stuttering is re lated to the encoding process of speaking." Sitzman (1968) taped and analyzed the spontaneous speech of 16 stutterers, age 16-53 years. He found that, in addition to initial phoneme and word length, signifi cantly more stuttering occurred on words of high information value than occurred on words of low information value. From the foregoing research, it can be concluded that information value and stuttering are directly related: when information value is high, stuttering is substantially increasedj conversely, when information value is low, stuttering is substantially decreased. Grammatical Function Grammatical function may be described as the usage class or category of a given word. Often, however, gram matical function is discussed in terms of two mutually ex clusive categories: (l) lexical or content words, i.e., nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, etc., or (2) function words, i.e., prepositions, determiners, conjunctions, etc. 11 Brown (1937^ 1945) identified grammatical function as one of the four major linguistic components related to the occurrence of stuttering. (The other three linguistic components were initial phoneme* word position* word length.) To investigate the relationship between grammatical factors and stuttering* Hahn (1942) asked 43 adult stutter ers to read a 550-word passage. He then analyzed these passages for instances of stuttering* and found that adjec tives* nouns* adverbs* and verbs were associated with the greatest amount of stuttering. Thus* Hahn concluded that it was possible to arrange the parts of speech in a hier archy of difficulty. Further* he stated that this hierarchy of difficulty was related to meaning with more stuttering occurring "on those words which convey the meaning in a sentence." Eisenson and Horowitz (1945) had 18 stutterers* age 17-20 years* read three 130-word passages. The three pas sages differed in their propositionality* that is* in their meaningfulness: passage one was a list of 130-words; passage two was a nonsense paragraph of 130-words; passage three was a meaningful paragraph of 130-words. Eisenson and Horowitz analyzed tapes of these three passages for in stances of stuttering and found that nouns* verbs* adjec tives and adverbs were more often stuttered than were pro nouns* prepositions* conjunctions and articles. Further* they found that an increase in propositional value resulted in an increase in stuttering on nouns, verbs, adverbs, and adjectives. Hejna (1955) examined taped samples of the spontane ous speech of 18 high-school stutterers. He found that, in addition to word length, word position, initial phoneme, and accent, grammatical function was a significant variable in determining instances of stuttering. Specifically, he found that significantly more stuttering occurred on nouns and adjectives than occurred on prepositions, articles, expletives, and interjections. Quarrington, Conway, and Siegel (1962) asked 2!J adult stutterers to read 64 six-word sentences. Each sentence contained a test word selected, among other things, to equally represent four grammatical categories. They concluded that, along with word position and initial pho neme, grammatical function was a significant factor in determining loci of stuttering. Their results were some what unusual in that, although grammatical class was a sig nificant factor in determining loci of stuttering, the specific class of words most stuttered was adverb. How ever, they stated that on closer inspection, the adverbs wore found to be somewhat longer than the other test words. Thus, they concluded that this increased word length may have contributed to the increased frequency of stuttering on adverbs. 13 Silverman and Williams (1967) had 15 stutterers read a 1000-word passage. These passages were taped and analyzed for loci of stuttering. Silverman and Williams found that, in addition to initial phoneme, word position, and word length, grammatical function was a significant factor in determining loci of stuttering. Specifically, they found that content words— nouns, verbs, adverbs, and adjectives— were more frequently stuttered than were func tion words. Soderberg (1967) analyzed the recorded passages of 10 stutterers, age 9-44 years. He found that, in medial clauses, lexical words were stuttered significantly more often than were function words. He found no significant differences among the instances of stuttering between lexi cal and function words in initial or final clauses, however. Bloodstein and Gantwerk (1967) taped the spontaneous speech of 13 stutterers, age 2-6 years, to study the rela tionship between stuttering and grammatical function. Their findings are markedly different from the findings re ported for adult stutterers. For the most part, stuttering was random. "But," they said, "there was a tendency for stuttering to occur unusually often on pronouns and conjunc tions, and less often on nouns and interjections." Thus, they concluded that a true grammatical factor in stuttering does not exist in the early phases of stuttering, but prob ably emerges with the emergence of difficult words. 14 In an attempt to identify determinants of stutter ing loci, Williams, Silverman, and Kools (1969) taped and analyzed speech samples of 152 children, who ranged from kindergarten through sixth grade in school placement. Half of the children were stutterers, half were non-stutterers. They identified grammatical function, initial phoneme, word position, and word length as determinants of stuttering for the stutterers. They also identified grammatical function and word length as determinants of disfluency for the non stutterers . With the exception of Bloodstein and Gantwerk (1967) and Soderberg (1967)* all of the authors discussed reported a strong relationship between stuttering loci and grammati cal class: content or lexical words are stuttered substan tially more often than are function words. Word Length Word length and the number of syllables in a word have been investigated by several authors as possible fac tors related to loci of stuttering. Brown (1937* 1945) and Brown and Moran (1942) iden tified word length as one of the four major linguistic com ponents related to the loci of stuttering. (The other three linguistic components were grammatical function, initial phoneme, word position.) Hejna (1955) analyzed the spontaneous speech samples 15 of 18 high-school stutterers, and found that, along with grammatical function, word position, initial phoneme, and accent, word length was related to loci of stuttering. He found significantly more stuttering on 6-, 8-, 9-, 10, and 11-letter words than on 2-and 3-letter words. Taylor (1966a, 1966b) examined the properties of stuttered words. He found that, among other things, longer rather than shorter words, are those more likely to be stuttered. Wingate (1967) investigated word length and word commonness as factors related to stuttering. He found that two-syllable words were more often stuttered than were one- syllable words. Further, he found considerably more stut tering on single-syllable uncommon words than on single syllable common words. And finally, he found approximately the same amount of stuttering on common and uncommon words of two-syllables. Thus, he concluded that "the frequency of stuttering as a function of word familiarity is related to the factor of word length." Schlesinger, Melkman, and Levy (1966) studied word length and word frequency in relation to stuttering. They found significantly more stuttering on the longer and on the less frequent words. Soderberg (1966) asked 20 stutterers, age 12-44 years, to read lists of words that varied in word length and word frequency. He found significantly more stuttering associated with longer and less frequent words. Silverman and Williams (1967) had 15 stutterers read a 1000-word passage. The passages were then analyzed for loci of stuttering. They found that words of five or more letters, as well as factors of grammatical class, initial phoneme, and word position were related to loci of stutter ing. Further, the greater the number of these four attri butes a given word possessed, the more likely that word would be stuttered. Sitzman (1968) taped and analyzed samples of the spontaneous speech of 16 stutterers, age 16-53 years. He found that, in addition to initial phoneme and information value, significantly more stuttering occurred on longer rather than on shorter words. Williams, Silverman, and Kools (1969) also identi fied word length as a factor related to the loci of stutter ing. In addition, they identified word length as a factor related to the loci of disfluency in the speech of non stutterers . The evidence here very strongly supports the notion that stuttering and word length are highly related to one another: substantially more stuttering occurs on longer words than occurs on shorter words. Word Position in Sentence The position of a word in a sentence has long been considered to be one of the variables related to stuttering. This possibility has been explored by several authors. Brown (19^5)* Hejna (l955)* Quarrington, Conway, and Siegel (1962), Quarrington (1965)* Taylor (1966a, 1966b), Soderberg (1967)* Silverman and Williams (1967)* and Williams, Silverman and Kools (1969) have all investi gated word position as a variable in stuttering, and have found that significantly more stuttering occurs on earlier rather than later words in a sentence. Sitzman (1968) also found word position to be sig nificantly related to the instances of stuttering in spon taneous speech. He found, however, that it was the last word of a sentence, and not the first or earlier words, that was more often stuttered. Thus, all of the authors cited have concluded that word position is significantly related to stuttering. And, with the exception of Sitzman (1968), all found that: ear lier rather than later words in a sentence tend to be more frequently stuttered. Initial Sound Initial sound refers to the vowel/consonant dichot omy. In the initial position of a word, which is more fre quently stuttered, a vowel or a consonant? 18 Brown (1945)* Hejna (1955)* Quarrington, Conway, and Siegel (1962), Taylor (1966a, 1966b), Silverman and Williams (1967)* Sitzman (1968), and Williams, Silverman, and Kools (1969) have all Investigated the relationship between ini tial vowel and initial consonant with respect to stuttering and have found that words beginning with consonants are stuttered significantly more often than words beginning with vowels. Soderberg (1962) tested 15 stutterers, age 12-41 years, to determine whether or not initial phoneme was a variable related to stuttering. He constructed three lists of five-syllable phrasesj each list had 15 phrases of 50- words. In list one, all word-initial sounds were vowels. In list two, all word-initial sounds were voiced consonants. In list three, all word-initial sounds were voiceless con sonants. Soderberg did not find any significant differ ences for instances of stuttering among the three lists. These results do not agree with the majority of previously- reported results. Thus, with the exception of Soderberg (1962), it may be said that authors generally have agreed that a rela tionship exists between instances of stuttering and the vowel/consonant dichotomy in the word-initial position: in the word-initial position, consonants are stuttered sub stantially more often than are vowels. CHAPTER III METHODS AND PROCEDURES Research Design This study investigated word familiarity as a factor related to the frequency and loci of stuttering. The independent variable was the S's familiarity with the word read 3 the dependent variable was the amount of stuttering in the S’s reading. Each S was given three vocabulary inventories. On the basis of the S's response to these, two word lists were compiled for each S: a list of words familiar to each S and a list of words unfamiliar to each S. The experimenter (E) then matched each S's unfami liar words to an equal number of that same S’s familiar words on the characteristics that are set forth In Table 1. Sentences were constructed for each test word by embedding the test word in a carrier-phrase. The same phrase was used for all words, both familiar and unfamiliar, with one test word per carrier-phrase. Each S then read his individual list of sentences (carrier-phrases plus em bedded test words) aloud twice. These readings were re corded and Judged by two listeners for instances of stutter ing. 19 TABLE 1 CONTROL OF VARIABLES FOR WORD MATCHING AND SENTENCE CONSTRUCTION Characteristic Variance Permitted* initial sound phoneme blend word length number of syllables grammatical function information value non-test words position in carrier-phrase Jonah words non-Jonah words none none 2 phonemes one none not determined none: one carrier-phrase was used for all test words, thus all non-test words were identical none: all test words were the 3rd word in the carrier-phrases none: Jonah never words were matched to Jonah frequently words none: non-Jonah never words were matched to non-Jonah frequently words *Ideally, there would be no variance permitted on any of these characteristics. However,, in a pilot study, the above vari ances were necessary for word-matching. Subjects Fifteen males and one female, all stutterers, were used in this study. Their ages ranged from 18-51 years, with a mean age of 29.38. They were selected from the available population of stutterers who had applied for therapy at the USC Stuttering Clinic. Materials The three standardized word inventories cited in Table 2 were used to establish the relative frequency of word usage for each S. 21 TABLE 2 STANDARDIZED WORD INVENTORIES USED Word Inventory No. of Words 1. Stanford-Binet Word List (Terman & Merrill* i960) 45 2. Ammons and Ammons Full-Range Picture Vocabulary Test-Form A (Ammons & Ammons* 1948) 85 3. Ammons and Ammons Full-Range Picture Vocabulary Test-Form B (Ammons & Ammons* 1948) 85 Total = 215 words Each S was given typed copies of these three word inventories and was asked to rate each of the words on these three inventories in terras of his frequency of usage in everyday speech. Each S was then given an answer sheet with the following categories: (l) don't recognize this word* (2) recognize but never use, (3) use occasionally* (4) use frequently. (See Appendix A for instructions to Ss.) When the S had completed the frequency ratings* he was then asked to look at the word inventories again and circle any word that was a Jonah word for him. That is* any word that he typically stutters on or avoids because he fears he would stutter on it. (See Appendix A for instruc tions to Ss.) In this way* the E attempted to eliminate expectancy to stutter as a variable from the S's subsequent reading samples (Johnson & Sin* 1937> Van Riper* 1937> 22 Knotty Johnson, & Webster, 1937; Wlschner, 1952). Only the "never" and the "frequently" words were used for the sen tences. The assumption was that never = unfamiliar, and that frequently = familiar. On the basis of each S's re sponse to the word inventories, a list of never words and a list of frequently words were extracted from the answer sheets. The never and frequently words for each S were then matched and a sentence was constructed for each test word (see Table l). Thus, each S had his own set of sen tences, based on his individual never and frequently word lists. Experimental Procedures The study consisted of two sessions for each S. At session one, each S was given the standardized word inven tories, and was instructed to score the words according to their occurrence in his everyday speech, and to circle any word that was a Jonah word for him. At session two, each S read aloud his individual list of sentences. Each sentence was read twice to control for order effects. The order of presentation of the sentences was as follows: Trial One...Each never sentence was paired with a frequently sentence. Then the pairs of sentences were read aloud. Thus, the S read a never sentence, then its frequently sentence pair, and so on through the pairs of sentences. Trial Two...This procedure was reversed to coun ter-balance for order effects. This time, the frequently sentence was read first, followed by its never sentence pair, and so on. 23 Evaluation After the experimental runs, two judges listened to the tapes of trials one and two, and independently circled the words stuttered on typed copies of the sentences. Agreement of both of these judges that a given word was stuttered was accepted as an instance of stuttering. (See Appendix B for instructions to judges.) Statistical Procedures Table 3 summarizes the statistical procedures em ployed in the analyses of the data. The .05 level of con fidence was accepted as significant in all analyses. 24 TABLE 3 STATISTICAL PROCEDURES EMPLOYED IN ANALYSES OF THE DATA Hypothesis or Data Statistical Method Statistic Hypothesis I: Significantly more stuttering -will he ob served. on unfamiliar words than on familiar words one-tailed t test for correlated means (Guilford, 1956) t Hypothesis II: Significantly more stuttering will he ob served on non-test words before -test words than sifter test words one-tailed t test for correlated means (Guilford, 1956) t Hypothesis III: Significantly more stuttering will be ob served on non-test words in never-word-sentences than in fre quently-word-sentence s one-tailed t _ test for correlated means (Guilford, 1956) t Hypothesis IV: A significant difference will be observed between the number of never and frequently words identi fied as Jonah words two-tailed t test for correlated means (Guilford, 1956) t Inter-judge reliability 2 x 2 descriptive table (Curlee, Michael, & Perkins, 1970) I --- ------------------------------ --------------- i CHAPTER IY RESULTS AMD DISCUSSION Stuttering Stuttering on Familiar and Unfamiliar Words Hypothesis I stated that there would be more stut tering on unfamiliar words than on familiar words. To test this hypothesis a t_ test for correlated means was employed (Guilford* 1956). The obtained t_ of 2.8517 with 15 degrees of freedom was found to be well above the tabled value of 2.602 necessary for significance at the .01 level of confi dence (Siegel* 1965). Thus* significantly more unfamiliar words (73) were stuttered than were familiar words (37). The difference scores* group means* and totals are presented in Table 4. It should be noted that the differ ence scores were obtained by subtracting frequently fre quencies from never frequencies. Thus* a positive number in the difference column indicates that there were more in stances of stuttering on never words than on frequently words. Conversely* a negative number indicates that there were more instances of stuttering on frequently words. Of the 16 Ss* only one had a negative number in the difference 25 i column. Three Ss, however, showed no difference. 26 TABLE 4 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN STUTTERING FREQUENCY ON FAMILIAR AND ON UNFAMILIAR WORDS Never Words Frequently Words Subjects Stuttered Stuttered Difference S 1 1 0 1 S 2 3 1 2 S 3 1 1 0 S 4 3 0 3 S 5 1 0 1 S 6 2 1 1 S 7 1 0 1 S 8 10 4 6 S 9 15 5 10 S10 0 0 0 Sll 3 6 -3 S12 7 6 1 S13 9 2 7 Sl4 1 1 0 S15 8 6 2 Sl6 8 4 4 Totals 73 37 36 27 Stuttering Frequency and Word Position Hypothesis II stated that there would be more stut tering on non-test words before test words than after test words. The obtained t_ of .2758 with 15 degrees of freedom was found to be far below the tabled value of 1.753 neces sary for significance at the .05 level (Siegel, 1965). In essence, there was no significant difference between the number of words stuttered before and after the test word. This finding is especially interesting since it is in direct opposition to the bulk of previously-reported findings for stuttering and word position. Brown (19^5)> Hejna (1955)# Quarrington, Conway, and Siegel (1962), Quarrington (1965)# Taylor ; ( 1966a, 1966b), Soderberg (1967)# Silverman and Wil- lians (1967)# Sitzman (1968), and Williams, Silverman, and Kools (1969) have all investigated word position as a vari able in stuttering, and have concluded that word position is significantly related to stuttering. And except for Sitzman (1968), all found that: earlier rather than later words in a sentence tend to be more frequently stuttered. A possible explanation for this discrepancy is that the present study was the only one which employed identical carrier-phrases with embedded test words. It could be argued that since all non-test words were identical, the information value was thus identical: either 0 0 or zero. Viewed from this angle, one could attribute the increased 28 stuttering on earlier words in previous studies to the high information value at the beginning of a sentence. In the present study, however, the information value of each test word was held constant by the order of presentation of the test words, and by the fact that all non-test words were exactly the same. Since there was no difference on the frequency of stuttering before or after the test words, it appears that stuttering is not dependent on word position when information value is held constant. The difference scores, group means, and totals are presented in Table 5. The difference scores were obtained by subtracting the stuttering frequency after test words from the stuttering frequency before test words. Thus, a positive number in the difference column indicates more stuttering before the test word. Conversely, a negative number indicates more stuttering after the test word. Stuttering on Non-Test Words in Never-Word-Sentences and in Frequently-Word Sentences Hypothesis III stated that there would be more stuttering on non-test words in never-word-sentences than in frequently-word-sentences. The obtained t_ of .6714 with 15 degrees of freedom was found to be far below the tabled value of 1.753 necessary for significance at the .05 level (Siegel, 1965). Thus, there was no significant difference between stuttering frequency on non-test words in never- ) 29 TABLE 5 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN STUTTERING FREQUENCY ON NON-TEST WORDS BEFORE' AND AFTER TEST WORDS Stuttering Before Stuttering After Subjects Test Word Test Word Difference S 1 1 0 1 S 2 0 1 -1 S 3 0 3 -3 S 4 10 0 10 S 5 5 0 5 S 6 0 0 0 S 7 0 0 0 S 8 3 10 -7 S 9 42 37 5 S10 0 0 0 Sll 15 14 1 S12 4 16 -12 S13 9 1 8 Sl4 0 5 -5 S15 6 44 -38 Sl6 58 2 56 Totals 153 133 20 30 word-sentences and in frequently-word-sentences. This find ing suggests that stuttering was indeed dependent on word familiarity and that the other variables were well con trolled. The difference scores, group means, and totals are presented in Table 6. The difference scores were obtained by subtracting the non-test words stuttered in frequently- word-sent ences from the non-test words stuttered in never- word-sentences. Thus, a positive number in the difference column indicates more stuttering on non-test words in never- word-sent ences . Conversely, a negative number indicates more stuttering on non-test words in frequently-word- sent ences . Supplementary Findings Hypothesis IV stated that there would be a differ ence between the number of never and frequently words iden tified as Jonah words. The obtained t_ of -8.0915 with 2 degrees of freedom was found to be well beyond the tabled value of 6.965 necessary for significance at the .02 level of confidence (Siegel, 1965). Thus significantly more frequently words (55) were identified as Jonah words than were never words (9). It was interesting to note, that of the 16 Ss only three reported having Jonah words. The difference scores, group means, and totals are presented in Table 7. The difference scores were obtained by subtracting the Jonah frequently words from the Jonah 31 TABLE 6 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN STUTTERING FREQUENCY ON NON-TEST WORDS IN NEVER-WORD-SENTENCES AND IN FREQUENTLY-WORD-SENTENCES Non-Test Words Non-Test Words Stuttered in Stuttered in Never-Word- Frequently-Word- Subjects Sent ences Sent ences Difference S 1 1 0 1 S 2 1 0 1 S 3 1 2 -1 S 4 7 3 4 S 5 1 4 -3 S 6 0 0 0 S 7 0 0 0 s 8 10 3 7 S 9 46 33 13 S10 0 0 0 Sll 13 16 -3 S12 9 11 -2 S13 2 8 -6 Sl4 4 1 3 S15 25 25 0 Sl6 29 31 -2 Totals 149 137 12 never words. Thus, a positive number in the difference column indicates that more never words were reported to be Jonah words. Conversely, a negative number in the differ ence column indicates that more frequently words were iden tified as Jonah words. TABLE 7 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NUMBER OF NEVER AND FREQUENCY WORDS IDENTIFIED AS JONAH WORDS J onah J onah Subjects Never Words Frequently Words Difference S 5 2 9 -7 S 8 1 15 -14 S 9 6 31 -25 Totals 9 55 -46 Inter-Judge Reliability Following the recommendations of Curlee, Michael, and Perkins (1970) the judges* agreement is illustrated in Table 8. The 16 Ss read a total of 6640 words. The judges agreed on the identity of 6231 fluent words. They also agreed on the identity of 395 specific stuttered words. J1 identified 8 words as stuttered that J2 felt were fluent. Conversely, J2 identified 5 words as stuttered that J1 identified as fluent. TABLE 8 JUDGES1 AGREEMENT ON SPECIFIC WORDS STUTTERED 33 Judge One YES Judge Two NO Total Words = 6640 Summary The findings of this investigation are summarized in Table 9. NO YES 5 396 6231 8 34 TABLE 9 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hypothesis or Data Statistical Method He suit s Hypothesis I: Signifi cantly more stuttering will he observed on unfamiliar words than on familiar words one-tailed t test for correlated means (Guilford, 1956) Significantly more stuttering on un familiar words p < .01 Hypothesis II: Signifi cantly more stuttering will be observed on non test words before test words than after test words one-tailed t test for correlated means (Guilford, 1956) No significant difference Hypothesis III: Signifi cantly more stuttering will be observed on non test words in never-word- sentences than in fre quent ly-wo rd-sentence s one-tailed t_ test for correlated means (Guilford, 1956) No significant difference Hypothesis IV: A signif icant difference will be observed between the num ber of never and fre quently words identified as Jonah words two-tailed t test for correlated means (Guilford, 1956) Significantly more frequently words identified as Jonah words p < .02 Inter-judge reliability 2 x 2 descriptive table (Curlee, Michael, & Perkins, 1970) Out of 6640 total words, Js agreed on 6231 specific fluent words, 596 specific stuttered words. Js dis agreed only 15 times i CHAPTER V SUMMARY^ CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS Summary The Problem The purpose of this study was to investigate word familiarity as a factor in determining loci and frequency of stuttering. The experimental hypotheses tested were: (l) significantly (p < .05) more stuttering will be observed on unfamiliar words than on familiar words; (2) significantly (p < .05) more stuttering will be observed on non-test words before test words than after test words; (3) significantly (p <. .05) more stuttering will be observed on non-test words in never-word-sentences than in frequently-word-sentences; (4) a significant difference (p < .05) will be observed between the number of never and frequently words identified as Jonah words. The Method Sixteen stuttering Ss participated in this study. Each S was given three vocabulary inventories and was asked to rate these 215 words in terms of his frequency of usage 1 i ; m i r / ..................... in everyday speech, and to circle any word that was a Jonah word for him. On the basis of the S's response to these 35 inventories, two word lists were compiled for each S: a list of words familiar to each S (frequently words) and a list of words unfamiliar to each S (never words). The never and frequently words for each S were matched on sev eral linguistic parameters. Sentences were then constructed for each test word by embedding the test word in a carrier- phrase. The same phrase was used for all words, both famil iar and unfamiliar, with one test word per carrier-phrase. Each S then read his individual list of sentences (carrier- phrase plus embedded test word) aloud twice. These readings were recorded and judged by two listeners for instances of stuttering. The Results Stuttering. Using a t_ test for correlated means, a significant difference (p <, .01) was found between the fre quency of never and frequently words stuttered, with more stuttering occurring on the never words. No significant differences were found between stuttering frequency on non test words before and after test words, or between stutter ing frequency on non-test words in never-word-sentences and in frequently-word-sentences. Supplementary findings. A significant t_ ratio beyond the .02 level characterized the difference between the number of never and frequently words identified as 37 Jonah words, with more frequently words being identified as Jonah words. Conclusions The results of this investigation support the fol lowing conclusions: 1. Stuttering occurs significantly more often on unfamiliar (never) words than on familiar (frequently) words. 2. The frequency of stuttering is not signifi cantly different on non-test words before and after test words. 3. The frequency of stuttering is not signifi cantly different on non-test words in never- word-sent ences and in frequently-word-sentences. 4. Significantly more frequently words than never- words are identified as Jonah words. Implications Limitations of the Study Within the limitations imposed by the nature of the experimental design and the number and selection of subjects, the results of this study provide support for the assumption that word familiarity is at least one variable in the pre cipitation of moments of stuttering. The following is a brief discussion of the limitations inherent in this study. 38 The central problems of this study concern the operational definitions of word frequency usage and the procedures used to ascertain it. Word frequency usage was defined in terms of each S’s responses to the three vocabu lary inventories. Any attempt to test a theory that uses a hypothesized internal event or response as an explanation of a subsequent response or behavior is indeed tenuous. It would be extremely difficult to demonstrate that procedures utilized to manipulate the independent variable did control possible confounding subject variables. For example, a subject may have changed his internal criteria of a never word or a frequently word midway through the word inven tories. Thus all of his never words might not be equally unfamiliar to him. Limitations to the inferences one can draw from the results of this study are also imposed by the fact that no two subjects will define word frequency usage in exactly the same way. Two other limitations of this study were the small sample size (l6) and the fact that only stutterers who were seeking therapy were used. Implications of Results In spite of these limitations, the results of this study were remarkably consistent. On Hypothesis I for ex ample, only one S out of 16 stuttered more frequently on 39 familiar words than on unfamiliar words. Thus, even though a causal relationship may be difficult to establish, a cor relational relationship certainly exists between word famil iarity and frequency of stuttering. Hypothesis III substantiates this relationship as it demonstrates that it is the test words only that are related to stuttering frequency. Hypothesis II has implications for the theories on word position as a variable that precipitates instances of stuttering. Namely, it appears that word position is not a causal factor in the high frequency of stuttering at the beginning of a sentence. For when information value is equal, there appears to be no relationship between word position in sentence and stuttering frequency. Hypothesis TV demonstrates the fact that stutterers respond differently to familiar and to unfamiliar words. It appears that a stutterer will identify a word as a Jonah word only after he has used It and experienced difficulty with some regularity. Implications for Future Research The following are some of the questions generated by this study that would lend themselves to future research in the area of word familiarity and stuttering: 1. Will the frequency of disfluency of non-stutterers be affected by word familiarity? 2. Will a subject's frequency usage judgments prove to be consistent on a retest? 3. What effect does adaptation have on subsequent frequency usage judgments? 4. Is there a continuum of stuttering frequency ranging from frequently words to unrecognized words? REFERENCES Ammons, R. B., 8 s Ammons, H. S. The Full-Range Picture Vocabulary Test. Missoula, Mon.: Psychological Test Specialists, 1948. Bloodstein, 0., & Gantwerk, B. Grammatical function in relation to stuttering in young children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 1967* 10, 786-789. Brown, S. The influence of grammatical function on the incidence of stuttering. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 1937* 2, 207-215. Brown, S. The loci of stuttering in the speech sequence. Journal of Speech Disorders, 1945, 10, 181-192. Brown, S., 8 s Moran, A. The frequency of stuttering in re lation to word length during oral reading. Journal of Speech Disorders, 1942, 7* 153-159. Curlee, R. P., Michael, W. B., 8 s Perkins, W. H. The reli ability of judgments of instances of stuttering. Paper presented at National Convention of American Speech and Hearing Association, New York, November 1970. Dunn, L. M. Expanded manual for the Peabody Picture Vocabu lary Test- ] ! Circle Pines, Minn.: American Guidance Service, Inc., 1965. Eisenson, J., 8 s Horowitz, E. The influence of proposition ality of stuttering. Journal of Speech Disorders, 1945* 10, 193-197. Fletcher, H. Speech and hearing in communication. New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1953. Guilford, J. P. Fundamental statistics in psychology and education. (3rd ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956. Hahn, E. F. A study of the relationship between stuttering occurrences and grammatical factors in oral reading. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 1942, J_, 329- 335. 42 43 Kejna, R. F. A study of the loci of stuttering in spontan eous speech. Dissertation Abstracts, 1955* 25* 1674- 1675. Hejna, R. F. Stuttering frequency in relation to word fre quency usage. American Speech and Hearing Association, 1963* 5* 781. Johnson, W., & Sinn, A. Studies in the psychology of stuttering: V. Frequency of stuttering with expectation of stuttering controlled. Journal of Speech Disorders, 1937* 2, 98-100. Knott, J. R., Johnson, W., & Webster, M. J. Studies in the psychology of stuttering: II. A quantitative evaluation of expectation of stuttering in relation to the occur rence of stuttering. Journal of Speech Disorders, 1937* 2, 20-22. Perkins, W. H. Physiological studies. In J. G. Sheehan (Ed.), Stuttering: Research and therapy. New York: Harper and Row, 1970. Quarrington, B. Stuttering as a function of the informa tion value and sentence position of words. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1965* 70* 221-224. Quarrington, B., Conway, J., & Siegel, N. An experimental study of some properties of stuttered words. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 1962, 5* 387-394. Rieger, E. Otzar Milot Hayessod. (List of basic words in Hebrew.) Jerusalem: Hebrew Teacher's Seminary, 1935. Schlesinger, I. M., Forte, M., Fried, B., & Melkman, R. Stuttering, information load, and response strengths. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 1965* 30* 32- 365 Schlesinger, I. M., Melkman, R., & Levy, R. Word length and frequency as determinants of stuttering. Psycho- nomic Science, 1966, 6, 255-256. Siegel, S. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences^ New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965. Silverman, F. H., & Williams, D. E. Loci of disfluencies in the speech of stutterers. Perceptual Motor Skills, 1967, 24, 1085-1086. Sitzman, R. B. Stuttering as a function of word predicta bility. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles, 1968. Soderberg, G. A. Phonetic influences upon stuttering. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 1962, 5j 315- 320. Soderberg, G. A. The relations of stuttering to word length and word frequency. Journal of Speech and Hearing Re search, 1966, 9. , 584-589. Soderberg, G. A. Linguistic factors in stuttering. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 1967.* 10, 801-810. Taylor, I. K. What words are stuttered? Psychological Bulletin, 1966, 65, 233-242. (a) Taylor, I. K. The properties of stuttered words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1966, 5j 112- H87 [bl Terman, L. M., & Merrill, M. A. Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, Forms, L-M. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, I960. Thorndike, E. L., & Lorge, I. The teacher's word book of 30,000 words. New York: Columbia University Teachers College, 1944. Van Riper, C. The preparatory set in stuttering. Journal of Speech Disorders, 1937> 2, 149-154. Wischner, G. J. An experimental approach to expectancy and anxiety in stuttering behavior. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 1952, 17> 139-154. Williams, D. E., Silverman, F. H., & Kools, J. A. Dis- fluency behavior of elementary-school stutterers and non-stutterers: Loci of instances of disfluency. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 1969* 12, 308- Wingate, M. E. Prosody in stuttering adaptation. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 1966, £, 550-556^ Wingate, M. E. Stuttering and word length. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 1967* 10> 146-151. r APPENDIXES 45 r APPENDIX A SUBJECTS* INSTRUCTIONS 46 1 INSTRUCTIONS TO THE SUBJECTS The purpose of this study is to determine how often you use certain words in everyday speaking situations. Please look at the word inventories I have given you and rate each of the words in terms of how frequently you use it in your everyday speech. As you can see, your an swer sheet has 4 categories: (l) don't recognize this word, (2) recognize but never use, (3) use occasionally, (4) use frequently. For each word, please mark one of these cate gories. Remember, rate the word according to how frequently you use it in your everyday speech. Are there any questions before you begin? Now, please look at the word inventories again and circle any word that is a "Jonah word" for you. That is, any word you would typically stutter on or avoid because you fear you would stutter if you used it. Are there any questions before you begin? 47 r APPENDIX B JUDGES' INSTRUCTIONS 48 t INSTRUCTIONS TO THE JUDGES You are going to hear a tape recording of 16 differ ent subjects who stutter. Each subject will read a series of sentences. You will be given typed copies of these sen tences. As you listen to each sentence, please circle the appropriate word on your typed copy for each instance of stuttering you hear. At the conclusion of each sentence, I will ask each of you how many instances of stuttering you heard. If the two of you do not agree upon the instances of stuttering, the sentences will be replayed a second time. If you dis agree a second time, this disagreement will be recorded and we will move to the next sentence. Please use your personal criteria to identify in stances of stuttering with the following exception: count all attempts made by the subject to say a given syllable or word as one Instance of stuttering. Are there any questions before we begin? 49 APPENDIX C SUBJECTS' ANSWER SHEET 50 r — ■ ■ i ANSWER SHEET Word Number Don't Recognize Word Never Use Occasionally Use Frequently Use 51 APPENDIX D WORD INVENTORIES 52 STANFORD-BINET WORD LIST (Terman and Merrill, i960) orange mosaic envelope stave straw bewail puddle ochre tap repose gown ambergris roar limpet eyelash frustrate Mars flaunt juggler incrustation scorch retroactive lecture philanthropy skill piscatorial brunette milksop muzzle harpy haste depredation peculiarity perfunctory priceless achromatic regard casuistry tolerate homunculus disproportionate sudorific lotus parterre shrewd 53 FULL-RANGE PICTURE VOCABULARY TEST ANSWER SHEET— FORM A R. B. Ammons and H. S. Ammons pie window seed sill transparent rectangular sector illumination culinary egress athletes competition revlry ebullience counter pump clerk sport recreation pugnacity replenishment retaliation shrubbery dwelling surf isolation horse wagon insect transportation antiquated discussion skill amour firecracker clothes explosion clean dehydration farm currency tranquillity agrarian furniture steel refreshment liquid container centigrade clock locket numbers engraving hot fear nutrition gorging poverty mastication itinerant coercion corpulence insatiable telephone crying accident vehicles destruction portrait c ommuni c at i on consolation negligence bereaved deleterious danger bed newspaper anaesthesia immersion displacement perusing propellers harbor locomotive nautical FULL-RANGE PICTURE VOCABULARY TEST ANSWER SHEET— FORM B R. B. Ammons and H. S. Ammons vegetable human dessert agriculture anti-socialness segment Intimidation translucent depredation phonograph transport terpsichorean car fight paying customer fuel sale purchas e transaction aggressiveness panels domicile island munificence bird fly conveyance passion impact dialogue discourse music laundry sudden garment manufacturing skyscraper industrial pecuniary spoon razor thermomet er mercury beverage tonsorial circle sentiment lobe chronometer pendant meal perspiration humid felony gourmand repast mendicant cheerful collision sympathy mishap propulsion condolence lacrimation policeman listening broadcast uniform safe protection authority gravitation catastrophe constabulary fortuitous bathtub operation cleanliness crisis somnolent supine train airplane Intersection, APPENDIX E SUBJECTS' DATA 56 r SUBJECTS' DATA SUMMARY SHEET Word Matching Variances Never Frequently Words with: more letters = 5 more letters = 5 more syllables = 6 more syllables = 6 Subjects with 0 Matching Variance 5, 6, 6/ 9, 10, 12, 15/ 16 Word Order Presentation Frequently _ p . . , Uovot- ~ 1j 3, A, 5, 14* 15, lo = 6, 7, 8, 9, io, n, 12, 13 Never Never Frequently Jonah Word Subjects 5, 8, 9 Variance = 0 letters = 0 syllables 57 TRIAL ONE* Subject #1 The word competition is the next one to be read. The word chronometer is the next one to be read. The word human is the next one to be read. The word harpy is the next one to be read. The word horse is the next one to be read. The word haste is the next one to be read. The word isolation is the next one to be read. The word immersion is the next one to be read. The word music is the next one to be read. The word mishap is the next one to be read. The word poverty is the next one to be read. The word pendant is the next one to be read. The word regard is the next one to be read. The word repose is the next one to be read. The word transparent is the next one to be read. The word translucent is the next one to be read. The word catastrophe is the next one to be read. The word conveyance is the next one to be read. The word discussion is the next one to be read. The word depredation is the next one to be read. The word mercury is the next one to be read. The word mosaic is the next one to be read. The word perspiration is the next one to be read. The word propulsion is the next one to be read. The word furniture is the next one to be read. The word firecracker is the next one to be read. *A11 of the data for subject #1 was included as an example. For subjects #2-#l6, only the word match ing data was included. 1 59 TRIAL TWO Subject #1 The word chronometer is the next one to be read. The word competition is the next one to be read. The word harpy is the next one to be read. The word human is the next one to be read. The word haste is the next one to be read. The word horse is the next one to be read. The word immersion is the next one to be read. The word isolation is the next one to be read. The word mishap is the next one to be read. The word music is the next one to be read. The word pendant is the next one to be read. The word poverty is the next one to be read. The word repose is the next one to be read. The word regard is the next one to be read. The word translucent is the next one to be read. The word transparent is the next one to be read. The word conveyance is the next one to be read. The word catastrophe is the next one to be read. The word depredation is the next one to be read. The word discussion is the next one to be read. The word mosaic is the next one to be read. The word mercury is the next one to be read. The word propulsion is the next one to be read. The word perspiration is the next one to be read. The word firecracker is the. next one to be read. The word furniture is the next one to be read. WORD MATCHING Subject #1 60 Wo. of Wo. of Grammatical Word Occurrence Letters Syllable s Function Variance chronometer never 11 4 noun 0 competition frequently 11 4 noun harpy- never 5 2 noun 0 human frequently 5 . . . 2 adj/noun haste never 5 1 verb/noun 0 horse frequently 5 1 adj/verb/noun immersion never 9 3 noun 0 isolation frequently 9 3 noun mishap never 6 2 noun 1 letter music frequently 5 2 noun pendant never 7 2 noun 1 syllable poverty frequently 7 3 noun repose never 6 2 verb/noun 0 regard frequently 6 2 verb/noun translucent never 11 3 adjective 0 transparent frequently 11 3 adjective conveyance never 10 3 noun 1 letter catastrophe frequently n 4 noun 1 syllable depredation never n 4 noun 1 letter discussion frequently 10 3 . noun 1 syllable mosaic never 6 3 noun 1 letter mercury frequently 7 3 noun propulsion never 10 3 noun 2 letters perspiration frequently 12 4 noun 1 syllable firecracker never Id 3 noun 2 letters furniture frequently 9 . . . 3 noun JL F V_ letters = 4 letters = 4 = 0 letters syllables = 1 syllables = 3 +2 syll. F 61 NEVER WORDS Subject #1 muzzle haste shrewd mosaic repose philanthropy harpy perfunctory homunculus illumination ebullience pugnacity antiquated amour firecracker dehydration centigrade gorging mastication itinerant negligence immersion propellers locomotive nautical translucent depredation conveyance pecuniary sentiment lobe chronometer pendant mendicant mishap propulsion condolence lacrimation fortuitous supine 62 FREQUENTLY WORDS Subject #1 lecture skill regard tolerate limpet pie window transparent athletes competition counter pump sport recreation retaliation surf isolation horse transportation discussion skill clothes clean tranquillity furniture refreshment liquid clock numbers hot fear poverty telephone communication bed newspaper vegetable human car fight paying customer sale purchase aggressiveness bird fly music laundry spoon razor mercury beverage circle meal perspiration listening uniform authority catastrophe crisis airplane 63 WORD MATCHING Subject #2 Word Occurrence No. of Letters No. of Syllables Grammatical Function Variance milksop mishap never frequently 7 6 2 2 noun noun 1 letter harpy human never frequently 5 5 . 2 2 noun noun 0 repose regard never frequently 6 6 2 2 noun noun 0 repast razor never frequently " 6 5 2 2 noun noun 1 letter depredation destruction never frequently n li 4 3 noun noun 1 syllable dehydration discussion never frequently 11 10 4 3 noun noun 1 letter 1 syllable corpulence cleanliness never frequently 10 n 3 3 noun noun 1 letter limpet laundry never frequently ' ' 6 . 7 2 2 noun noun 1 letter Mars meal never frequently 4 4 1 1 noun noun 0 stave steel never frequently 5 5 1 1 verb verb 0 supine sudden never frequently 6 6 2 2 adjective adjective 0 N F V letters = 3 letters =2 = +1 letters N syllables = 2 syllables =0 = +2 syll. N WORD MATCHING Subject #3 64 No. of No. of Grammatical Word Occurrence Letters Syllables Function Variance ochre never 5 1 noun 1 letter orange frequently 6 2 noun 1 syllable chronometer never 11 4 noun 0 competition frequently 11 4 noun egress never 6 1 noun 1 letter eyelash frequently 7 2 noun 1 syllable ebullience never 10 2 noun 2 letters envelope frequently 8 . . . 3 noun 1 syllable repast never ' 6 2 noun 0 regard frequently 6 2 noun stave never 5 1 noun/verb 0 straw frequently . .5 1 noun milksop never 7 2 noun 2 letters music frequently 5 2 noun N F V letters = 4 letters -2 = +2 letters N syllables = 0 syllables =3 = +3 syll. F 65 WORD MATCHIWG Subject #k Word Occurrence Wo. of Letters Wo. of Syllables Grammatical Function Variance ambergis authority never frequently 9 ..9 3 4 noun noun 1 syllable achromatic antiquated never frequently 10 10 i j - k adjective adjective 0 corpulence condolence never frequently 10 10 3 noun noun 0 constabulary consolation never frequently 12 11 k noun/adj. noun 1 letter deleterious WO MATCH never frequently 11 5 adjective WO MATCH gourmand garment never frequently 8 7 2 2 noun noun 1 letter piscatorial perfunctory never frequently 11 11 5 k adjective adjective 1 syllable pugnacity propellers never frequently 9 10 k . 3 ... noun noun 1 letter 1 syllable somnolent WO MATCH never frequently 9 3 adjective WO MATCH sudorific sentiment never frequently 9 . 9 4 . .3 i i •«"3 o3 8 8 1 syllable terpsichorean WO MATCH never frequently 13 5 adjective WO MATCH W F V letters = 2 letters =1 = +1 letter W syllables = 3 syllables =1 = +2 syll. W 66 WORD MATCHING Subject #5 No. of No. of Gramma.t-t anl Word Occurrence Letters Syllables Function Variance consolation never 11 4 noun 0 competition frequently 11 4 noun corpulence never 10 3 noun 1 letter container frequently . 9 . . 3. . . noun depredation never 11 4 noun 1 syllable destruction frequently 11 . 3. . noun discourse never 9 2 noun 1 letter discussion frequently 10 3 noun 1 syllable ^muzzle never 6 2 noun 1 letter *music frequently ... 5 . . 2 noun nautical never 8 3 adjective 1 letter newspaper frequently 9 . . 3 adj./noun stave never 5 l noun/verb 0 steel frequently 5 . l noun/verb/adj. *JonaJa words _N _F= V. letters = 2 letters =2 = 0 letters syllables = 1 syllables =1 = 0 syllables WORD MATCHING Subject #6 67 No. of No. of Grammatical Word Occurrence Letters Syllables Function Variance chronometer never 11 4 noun 0 competition frequently 11 4 noun culinary never 8 3 adjective 1 syllable cheerful frequently 8 2 adjective discourse never 9 2 noun 1 letter iialogue frequently 8 3 noun 1 syllable engraving never 9 3 noun 0 explosion frequently 9 ■ P noun incrustation never 12 4 noun 0 intersection frequently 12 4 noun insatiable never 10 4 adjective 0 industrial frequently 10 4 adjective locket never 6 2 noun 1 letter laundry frequently 7 2 noun muzzle never 6 2 noun 0 mishap frequently 6 2 noun Mars never 4 1 noun 0 meal frequently 4 1 noun nutrition never 9 3 noun 0 newspaper frequently 9 3 noun/adj. repo se never 6 2 noun 1 letter razor frequently 5 2 noun sentiment never 9 3 noun 1 letter sympathy frequently 8 . 3 noun tranquillity never 12 4 noun 2 letters transportat ion frequently l4 4 noun depredation never 11 4 noun 1 letter discussion frequently 10 . . . . 3 noun 1 syllable eyelash never 7 2 noun 1 letter envelope frequently 8 3 noun 1 syllable J L J L . V letters = A letters = A = 0 letters syllables = 2 syllables =2 = 0 syllables WORD MATCHING Subject #7 68 No. of No. of Grammatical Word Occurrence Letters Syllables Function Variance achromatic never 10 b adjective 0 antiquated frequently 10 b adjective bereaved never "~g~ 2 verb 1 letter broadcast frequently 9 2 verb/noun coercion never 8 3 noun 0 customer frequently 8 3 noun chronometer never 11 b noun 0 consolation frequently 11 b noun depredation never 11 k noun 1 syllable destruction frequently 11 . 3 noun harpy never 5 2 noun 0 human frequently . . 3 2 noun insatiable never 10 k adjective 0 industrial frequently 10 b adjective incrustation never 12 b noun 0 intersection frequently 12 b noun lotus never 5 2 noun 1 letter locket frequently 6 2 noun Mars never b 1 noun 0 meal frequently b 1 noun milksop never 7 2 noun 1 letter mishap frequently 6 2 noun repose never ' 6 2 noun 0 regard frequently 6 2 noun repast never 6 2 noun 1 letter razor frequently 5 2 noun stave never 5 1 noun/verb 0 steel frequently 5 1 noun/verb/adj. JL F X. letters = 2 letters =2 = 0 letters syllables = 1 syllables =0 = +1 syll. N 69 WORD MATCHING Subject #8 Word anaesthesia agriculture Occurrence No. of Letters No. of Syllables Grammatical Function Variance never frequently 11 11 X X noun noun 0 chronometer never 11 X noun 0 competition frequently 11 X noun depredation never 11 k noun 0 dehydration frequently 11 X noun domicile never 8 3 noun 1 syllable dwelling frequently 8 2 noun ebullience never 10 2 noun 1 letter explosion frequently 9 3 noun 1 syllable lacrimation never 11 X noun 1 letter locomotive frequently 10 4 noun pendant never 7 2 noun 1 syllable poverty frequently 7 I noun tonsorial never 9 X adjective 2 letters transparent frequently 11 3 adjective 1 syllable N F V letters = 2 letters =2 =0 letters syllables = 2 syllables =2 =0 syllables 70 WORD MATCHING Subject j f = 9 Word *depredation *destruction Occurrence never frequently No. of Letters No. of Syllables . . 5. . Grammatical Function Variance 11 11 noun noun 1 syllable domicile never 8 3 noun 0 dialogue frequently 8 3 noun egress never 6 1 noun 1 letter eyelash frequently 7 2 noun 1 syllable ebullience never 10 2 noun 1 letter explosion frequently 9 3 noun 1 syllable harpy never 5 2 noun 0 harbor frequently 5 2 noun *pendant never 7 2 noun 1 letter *purchase frequently 8 2 noun incrustation never 12 b noun 0 intersection frequently 12 k noun repose never 6 2 noun 0 regard frequently 6 2 noun repast never 6 2 noun 1 letter razor frequently . . 5 2 noun supine never 6 2 noun/adj. 0 sudden frequently 6 2 adjective translucent never 11 3 adjective 0 transparent frequently 11 3 adjective casuistry never 9 b noun 1 syllable container frequently 9 3 noun coercion never 8 3 noun 0 customer frequently 8 . 3 noun chronometer never 11 b noun 0 consolation frequently 11 k noun * Jonah, words N F V letters = 2 letters =2 =0 letters syllables = 2 syllables =2 =0 syllables 71 WORD MATCHING Subject $10 Word Occurrence No. of Letters No. of Syllables Grammatical Function Variance casuistry never 9 ^ , , noun 2 letters competition frequently 11 k noun harpy never 5 2 noun 0 harbor frequently 5 2 noun lacrimation never 11 noun 1 letter locomotive frequently 10 k noun parterre never 8 2 noun 0 purchase frequently 8 2 noun repose never 6 2 noun 1 letter razor frequently .5. 2 noun N F V letters = 2 letters =2 =0 letters syllables = 0 syllables =0 =0 syllables 72 WORD MATCHING Subject #11 Word insatiable industrial Occurrence never frequently No. of Letters 10 10 No. of Syllables Grammatical Function adjective noun/ad.j. Variance limpet laundry never frequently X 2 2 noun noun 1 letter repose regard never frequently 6 6 2 2 noun noun stave steel never frequently 5 X 1 1 verb verb 0 munificence manufacturing never frequently 11 JX noun noun/verb 2 letters 1 syllable N letters syllables F 0 letters = 3 0 syllables = 1 = +3 letters F = +1 syll. F r.... 73 WORD MATCHING Subject #12 Word Occurrence No. of Letters No. of Syllables Grammatical Function Variance coercion customer never frequently 8 8 3 3 noun noun 0 corpulence consolation never frequently 10 11 3 k noun noun 1 letter 1 syllable depredation destruction never frequently 11 11 k noun noun 1 syllable insatiable industrial never frequently 10 10 k adjective noun/adj. 0 limpet laundry never frequently 6 7 . 2 2 noun noun 1 letter milksop music never frequently 7 . 5 2 2 noun noun 2 letters propulsion protection never frequently 10 10 3 . 3 noun noun 0 F V letters = 2 letters =2 =0 letters syllables = 1 syllables =1 =0 syllables WORD MATCHING Subject #13 74 f 0 Hi No. of Grammatical Word Occurrence Letters Syllables Function Variance conveyance never 10 3 noun 1 letter competition frequently 11 4 noun 1 syllable condolence never 10 3 noun 2 letters customer frequently 8 3 noun flaunt never 6 l noun/verb 1 letter fight frequently .3 1 noun/verb illumination never 12 5 noun 1 syllable intersection frequently 12 4 noun lotus never 5 2 noun 1 letter liquid frequently 6 2 noun/adj. mastication never 11 I t - noun 2 letters manufacturing frequently .. 5 noun/verb 1 syllable puddle never 6 2 verb/noun 0 paying frequently 6 2 verb pendant never 7 2 noun 1 letter purchase frequently 8 2 noun/verb repose never ' 6 2 noun 0 regard frequently 6 2 noun retroactive never 11 i t - adjective 0 rectangular frequently 11 k adjective repleni shment never 13 k noun 2 letters refreshment frequently 11 3 noun 1 syllable fortuitous never 10 3 adjective 1 letter frustrate frequently 9 2 adj./verb 1 syllable n F JV- letters = 6 letters =5 = +1 letters N syllables = 3 syllables =2 = +1 syll. N WORD MATCHING Subject #l4 75 Word Occurrence No. of Letters No. of Syllables Grammatical Function Variance farm never 4 1 noun/verb 1 letter fight frequently 5 1 noun/verb industrial never 10 4 noun 1 letter isolation frequently 9 3 noun 1 syllable locket never 6 2 noun 0 liquid frequently 6 2 noun/adj. Mars never 4 1 noun 0 meal frequently 4 1 noun muzzle never 6 2 noun 1 letter music frequently . . . 5. 2 noun nutrition never 9 3 noun 0 newspaper frequently 9 _ . 3 noun/adj. ochre never 5 l noun 1 letter orange frequently 6 2 noun 1 syllable puddle never ' 6 2 noun/verb 2 letters purchase frequently 8 2 noun/verb repose never 6 2 noun 1 letter razor frequently .. 1 2 noun vehicles never 8 3 noun 1 letter vegetable frequently 9 4 noun/adj. 1 syllable counter never 7 2 n/v/adv/adj. 1 syllable clothes frequently 7 1 noun N F letters = 3 letters =5 = +2 syllables = 2 syllables =2=0 V letters F syllables — — WORD MATCHING Subject #15 76 Wo. of Wo. of Grammatical Word Occurrence Letters Syllables Function Variance corpulence never 10 3 noun 0 conveyance frequently 10 3 noun chronometer never 11 k noun 0 competition frequently 11 k noun constabulary never 12 k noun/adj. 1 letter communi cat ion frequently 13 5 noun 1 syllable depredation never 11 k noun 1 syllable destruction frequently 11 3 noun fortuitous never 10 3 adjective 1 letter frustrate frequently 9 2 adj./verb 1 syllable insatiable never 10 A adjective 0 industrial frequently 10 k adj./noun ochre never 5 1 noun 1 letter orange frequently 6 2 noun 1 syllable pendant never 7 2 noun 0 passion frequently 7 2 noun repose never 6 2 noun 1 letter razor frequently 5 2 noun supine never 6 2 adjective 0 sudden frequently 6 2 adjective w F JL letters = 2 letters =2 =0 letters syllables = 2 syllables =2 =0 syllables WORD MATCHING Subject #l6 77 No. of No. of Grammatical Word Occurrence Letters Syllables Function Variance anaesthesia never 11 k noun 2 letters authority frequently . . . . 9 k adj./noun brunette never 8 2 noun/adj. 1 letter broadcast frequently 9 2 noun/verb currency never 8 3 noun 0 customer frequently 8 3. noun clerk never 5 1 verb/noun 0 clean frequently . . 9 1 verb/adj/adv crisis never 6 2 noun 1 letter counter frequently . . . 7. 2 noun/adj horse never 5 1 noun 0 haste frequently . 5 1 noun locket never 6 2 noun 0 liquid frequently 6 2 noun/adj Mars never 1 noun 0 meal frequently k 1 noun nutrition never 9 3 noun 0 newspaper frequently 9 3 noun/adj panels never 6 2 noun/verb 0 paying frequently 6 2 noun/verb propulsion never 10 3 noun 0 protection frequently 10 . 3. . noun portrait never 8 2 noun 0 purchase frequently 8 2 noun/verb propellers never 10 3 noun 1 letter policeman frequently 9 2 noun 1 syllable regard never 6 2 noun 1 letter razor frequently . 5 2 noun surf never k 1 noun/verb 0 safe frequently k 1 adj/noun seed never k 1 noun/verb 0 sale frequently k 1 noun transport never 9 2 noun/verb 0 telephone frequently 9 2 noun/verb vehicles never 8 3 noun 1 letter vegetable frequently 9 k noun/adj. wagon never 5 2 noun/verb 1 letter window frequently 6 2 noun JL F V letters = k letters = k = 0 letters syllables = 1 syllables =1 = 0 syllables

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Frequency Of Stuttering As A Function Of Connotative Word Meaning

PDF

Effect Of Types Of Rehearsal On Frequency Of Stuttering

PDF

Autonomic correlates of stuttering, fluency, and threat-of-shock

PDF

Listener Identification Of 'Stuttering' And 'Stutterer' As A Function Of Variation In Speech Patterns

PDF

Speech And Language Characteristics Of Children With Developmental Dyslexia

PDF

An Investigation Of Pupillary Response Preceding Expectancy And Stuttering

PDF

Stuttering and time perspective

PDF

An Experimental Study Of The Effects Of Fluency Feedback And Stuttering Feedback On The Subsequent Frequency Of Stuttering Utterance Duration, And Latency Of Response

PDF

Auditory Verbal And Visual Manual Sign Decoding Of Verbal And Nonverbal Autistic Children: A Study Of Cross-Modality Versus Within-Modality Processing

PDF

Differential Effects Of Contingent Positive And Negative Listener Response On The Percentage Of Syllable Disfluency Of Preschool Boys

PDF

The Effects Of Separating Production From Perceptual Judgment Of Articulation In Children With Articulatory Defects

PDF

The Effects Of Stuttering On Systolic Blood Pressure

PDF

An Analysis And Comparison Of The Figure-Ground And Visual Closure Abilities Of Two Preschool Groups Of Children With A Deprived Or Advantaged Language Background

PDF

The Discrimination Of Directionality And Its Relation To Laterality And Measures Associated With Language Proficiency

PDF

A Study Of The Influence Of Wife-As-Therapist On Language Progress With Adult Male Dysphasics

PDF

Effect Of Selected Combinations Of Stimuli On Communicative Responses Of Children With Downs Syndrome

PDF

Effects Of Deglutition And Speech Training On Dental Overjet

PDF

A Normative Study Of Oral Sensation And Perception: Two-Point Discrimination, Form Identification, Tactile Pattern Recognition, And Mandibular Kinesthesia

PDF

Changes In The Intensity Of An Overt Response Before, During, And After Instances Of Stuttering

PDF

Chronological Age And Grammatical Development As Determinants Of The Proportions Of Disfluencies On Lexical And Function Words In Preschool Children

Asset Metadata

Creator Cooper, Donna Jean (author)

Core Title Word Familiarity And Frequency Of Stuttering

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Communicative Disorders

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag health sciences, speech pathology,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Advisor Perkins, William H. (committee chair), Briere, Eugene J. (committee member), Haney, Russell (committee member), Michael, William B. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-484354

Unique identifier UC11362483

Identifier 7221661.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-484354 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 7221661

Dmrecord 484354

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Cooper, Donna Jean

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA