Frequency Of Stuttering As A Function Of Connotative Word Meaning

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Request accessible transcript

Transcript (if available)

Content This dissertation has b een
microfilmed exactly as received 69-5070
SPAHR, F red erick Thom as, 1939-
FREQUENCY OF STUTTERING AS A FUNCTION
OF CONNOTATIVE WORD MEANING.
U n iversity of Southern C alifornia, Ph.D ., 1968
Speech Pathology
University Microfilms, Inc., A nn Arbor, M ichigan
FREQUENCY OF STUTTERING AS A FUNCTION
OF CONNOTATIVE W ORD MEANING
by
F r e d e r ic k Thomas Spahr
A D i s s e r t a t i o n P r e s e n te d t o the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In P a r t i a l F u l f i l l m e n t o f the
R equirem ents fo r the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(Communicative D is o r d e r s )
August 1968
UNIVERSITY O F S O U T H E R N CALIFORNIA
T H E G RA D U A TE SC H O O L
U N IV ER SIT Y PA RK
L O S A N G E LE S. C A L IFO R N IA 9 0 0 0 7
This dissertation, written by
.....................Frederick ..Thorna. s„Sgah_r.....................
under the direction of his..—Dissertation Com
mittee, and approved by all its members, has
been presented to and accepted by the Graduate
School, in partial fulfillment of requirements
for the degree of
O Q T O R OF P H I L O S O P H Y
Dean
D fl^..A ugust,!968
TABLE OP CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................... i v
Chapter
I . INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 1
S ta tem en t o f th e P r o b l e m .......................................... ' 2
. Im portance o f th e Study . . ................................ 5
I I . REVIEW OF LITERATURE............................................................ 7
C o n n o ta tiv e Word Meaning ........................................... 7
Measurement o f Meaning ..................................... . 8
C o n d itio n in g o f Word Meaning ........................... 8
S u m m a r y ................................................................................ 12
S t u t t e r i n g and Word Meaning . . . . . . . 13
P r o p o s i t i o n a l i t y o f Speech and
S t u t t e r i n g ..................................................................... 13
A f f e c t i v e Speech C ontent and
S t u t t e r i n g .................................................... 14
C o n d itio n in g o f S t u t t e r i n g ..................................... 17
I I I . METHODS AND PROCEDURES...................................................... 19
O verview o f th e D esign . . ................................ 19
S u b j e c t s ..................................................................................... 20
M a te r ia ls and Apparatus . . . . . . . . . 21
T r a in in g P roced u res ..................................................... 22
E xp erim en ta l P ro c ed u r es . ..................................... 23
In te r ju d g e R e l i a b i l i t y ................................................ 26
S t a t i s t i c a l D esig n .......................................................... 27
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . ............................ 29
C o n n o ta tiv e Word Meaning Change . . . . . 29
N e u tr a l F lu e n t Words „ ........................................... 29
N e g a tiv e S t u t t e r e d Words ..................................... 30
N e u tr a l S t u t t e r e d Words ...................................... 31
Summary ......................................................... 31
ii
J
Chapter Page
S t u t t e r in g . . . . . . . . . . .
C on d ition E ........................................
C on dition F .........................................
C on d itio n T ........................................
A ll C o n d i t i o n s ...................................
S in g le S u b ject A nalyses o f
A s s o c ia t io n ............................... ,
Supplementary F indings . . . . .
S t u t t e r in g on UCSs . . . . ,
In terju d g e R e l i a b i l i t y . . . ,
S i m i la r i t y o f S ca le R esponses
Among S u b je cts ..............................
V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS
Summary . . .
The Problem
Method . . .
R e s u lts . .
C on clu sion s
I m p lic a tio n s .
I m p lic a tio n s
I m p lic a tio n s
F in dings .
I m p lic a tio n s
o f the Main E f f e c t s .
o f Supplementary
f o r Future Research .
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
APPENDIX D
APPENDIX E
APPENDIX F
Words U t i l i z e d in T rain in g
Procedures ..........................
Words U t i l i z e d in
E xperim ental Procedures
Sample Judgment Sh eet fo r
S caled Responses . . .
I n s t r u c t io n s to S u b je cts
fo r S caled Responses
I n s t r u c t io n s to Judges
Tables 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6
R e s u lts o f Change in
C onnotative Word
Meaning Response . . .
32
32
36 |
36 |
36 i
3 8!
38 |
38'
40 |
I
41!
43 |
43 I
43!
44!
46;
47 !
48 !
48 !
i
5 1 1
52 ;
j
55 I
60 |
j
62 j
64 I
66 !
69 ;
71
i n
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Nature o f Data O btained, S t a t i s t i c a l
Method, and S t a t i s t i c Employed in
A nalyses o f the D a t a .................................................... 28
2. D if f e r e n c e s between P re -C o n d itio n in g
and P o st-C o n d itio n in g S c a le R esponses
fo r N eu tral F lu en t Words o f
C on d ition E ........................................................................ 72
3. D if f e r e n c e s between P r e -C o n d itio n in g
and P o st-C o n d itio n in g S c a le Responses
fo r N eu tral F lu en t Words o f
C on d ition F ........................................................................ 73
4. D iff e r e n c e s between P re -C o n d itio n in g
and P o s t-C o n d itio n in g S c a le Responses
fo r N eu tral F lu en t Words of
C on d ition T ........................................................................ 74
5. D if f e r e n c e s between P re -C o n d itio n in g
and P o st-C o n d itio n in g S c a le Responses
fo r N eg a tiv e S tu tte r e d Words o f
C on dition E ...................................................................... 75
6. D if fe r e n c e s between P re -C o n d itio n in g
and P o st-C o n d itio n in g S c a le Responses
fo r N eu tr a l S tu tte r e d Words of
C ondition F ......................................................... 76
7. Pre-Treatm ent and Post-T reatm ent
Measures of Moments o f S t u t t e r in g on
N eutral F lu en t Words fo r C on dition E . . . 33
8. Pre-Treatm ent and Post-T reatm ent
Measure's o f Moments o f S t u t t e r in g on
N eu tral F lu en t Words fo r C on d itio n F . . . 34
i
iv
jTable ' Page
! 9. P re-T reatm en t and P o st-T re a tm en t
! M easures o f Moments o f S t u t t e r i n g on
; N e u tr a l F lu en t Words f o r C o n d itio n T . . . . 35
; 10. Summary o f th e A n a ly s is o f V arian ce o f j
th e D i f f e r e n c e S c o r es f o r T a b les 7, i
8 and 9 37 i
1
i
i 11. D V alues f o r K olm ogorov-Sm irnov T e st: j
A s s o c ia t i o n betw een Moments o f I
S t u t t e r i n g and S c a le R esp o n ses 39 |
: j
I
V
: CHAPTER I !
. J
; J
t ■
: INTRODUCTION i
• i
i Sp eech, as a n e c e s s a r y c o n d i t i o n fo r th e o c cu rr en ce •
iof s t u t t e r i n g , must be c o n sid e r e d in any e x p la n a t io n o f
t h i s problem . Many t h e o r i e s o f s t u t t e r i n g c o n t a in h y p oth
e s e s th a t s u g g e s t t h a t l i n g u i s t i c p a ra m eters o f th e o r a l - j
v e r b a l p r o c e s s a c t as p r e c i p i t a t i n g a g e n ts fo r moments o f
s t u t t e r i n g . Three w id e ly a c c e p te d e x p la n a t io n s c o n ta in
c e n t r a l t e n e t s th a t p o s i t word p r o p e r t i e s , beyond p h o n e tic
and p r o s o d ic f a c t o r s , as i n t e r v e n in g v a r i a b l e s to p r e c i p i
t a t e moments o f s t u t t e r i n g . W ischner (1 9 5 0 ) th e o r iz e d th a t
c e r t a i n words become c o n d it io n e d s t i m u l i fo r a n x ie t y a r o u s a l
w h ich , in tu r n , r e s u l t s i n th e a v o id a n ce b e h a v io r o f s t u t
t e r i n g - As h y p o th e s iz e d in th e C o n f l i c t Theory o f S t u t
t e r i n g (Sh eehan , 1958, p . 1 3 6 ), in c r e a s e d e m o tio n a l c o n te n t
o f u t t e r a n c e s , on th e word and s i t u a t i o n a l l e v e l s o f con
f l i c t , r e s u l t s in in c r e a s e d s t u t t e r i n g . The P s y c h o a n a ly t ic
Theory o f S t u t t e r i n g (G lau b er, 1958, p . 77) em phasized th e
iunique f u n c t i o n o f words to s t u t t e r e r s . The p a r t i c u l a r
^ in t r in s ic n eeds met by words are e x p r e sse d by th e s t u t t e r in g !
i . i
jbehavior.
2
A lthou gh each t h e o r e t i c a l b a s i s employs d i f f e r e n t
te r m in o lo g y t o f i t w it h in the framework o f the p a r t i c u l a r
c o n s t r u c t , a s i n g l e t e n e t em erges: word p r o p e r t i e s unique
t o the sp ea k er are c a u s a l f a c t o r s o f s t u t t e r i n g b e h a v io r .
C o n n o ta tiv e word meaning has been d e fin e d as the un iqu e,
h i s t o r i c a l a s s o c i a t i o n o f a p a r t i c u l a r word to a p a r t i c u l a r
sp eak er (Osgood, S u c i, and Tannenbaum, 1 9 5 7 ). T h e r e fo r e , a
s i n g l e h y p o t h e s is i s deduced from the th r e e t h e o r i e s : s t u t
t e r i n g i s a f u n c t io n o f c o n n o t a t iv e word m eaning.
I t i s n e c e s s a r y to make a c r i t i c a l d i s t i n c t i o n among
t h e s e th r e e t h e o r i e s as th e y r e l a t e t o the h y p o t h e s is th a t
s t u t t e r i n g i s a f u n c t i o n o f word m eaning. T h is d i s t i n c t i o n
con cern s the u n i v e r s a l i t y o f the assum ption th a t s t u t t e r i n g
i s , in d e e d , a s s o c i a t e d w ith word m eaning. Glauber and
W ischner s u g g e s t th a t a d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t s betw een
i n t e n s i t y o f meaning and fre q u en cy o f s t u t t e r i n g . S h eeh an ’s
th e o r y , however, p o s i t s t h a t o n ly some words w ith in t e n s e
meaning are a s s o c i a t e d c a u s a l l y w ith s t u t t e r i n g . T h e r e fo r e ,
a t e s t o f the h y p o t h e s is must c o n s id e r t h i s v a r ia n c e in
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f the v a r io u s t h e o r i e s .
S tatem en t o f the Problem
The g e n e r a l purpose o f t h i s stu d y i s t o t e s t the
h y p o t h e s is th a t fre q u en cy o f s t u t t e r i n g i s a f u n c t i o n o f
c o n n o t a t iv e word m eaning.
One o f the primary problems posed i n the t e s t o f
!the h y p o t h e s is co n cern s th e measurement and e x p e r im e n ta l
[change o f c o n n o t a tiv e word m eaning. Osgood, S u c i, and
jTannenbaum (1957) d e v is e d a method c a l l e d Sem antic D i f f e r -
! j
i j
j e n t i a t i o n by which word m eanings co u ld be q u a n t i f i e d u s in g j
[b ip o la r , a d j e c t i v e s c a l e s . S t a a t s and S t a a t s (1957) demon- ;
! i
|s t r a t e d th a t c o n n o t a t iv e word m eaning, as measured on p a r - j.
|t i c u l a r sem a n tic d i f f e r e n t i a l s c a l e s , co u ld be changed i
through c l a s s i c a l c o n d i t i o n i n g p r o c e d u r e s.
j ;
Thus, the l o g i c o f t h i s e x p e r im e n ta l d e s ig n i s as <
;f o l lo w s : i f s c a l e r e sp o n s e s t h a t d e f in e the e v a l u a t i v e
dim ension o f c o n n o t a t iv e word meaning can be changed by
c l a s s i c a l c o n d i t i o n i n g p r o c e d u r e s, and i f changes in f r e
quency o f s t u t t e r i n g are ob served su b seq u en t t o c o n n o ta t iv e
word meaning change, then fr e q u e n c y o f s t u t t e r i n g i s a.
f u n c t i o n o f c o n n o t a t iv e word meaning. The d e g ree o f a s s o
c i a t i o n betw een s t u t t e r i n g moments and i n t e n s i t y of word
meaning s e r v e s as an a d d i t i o n a l t e s t o f the h y p o t h e s i s .
Only the n e g a t i v e d i r e c t i o n o f c o n n o t a t iv e word
meaning was e x p lo r e d in th e p r e s e n t s tu d y . S in c e W ischner ;
t h e o r iz e d th e av oid an ce o f f e a r e d words and p r e v io u s e x p e r
i m e n t a t i o n (B a r d r ic k , 1956) employed n e g a t iv e m a t e r ia l, the
In egative d i r e c t i o n was c o n s id e r e d the l o g i c a l p o in t o f d e - ;
p a r tu r e f o r word meaning. In a d d it io n , the u se o f one
id ir e c t i o n in c r e a s e d th e e f f i c i e n c y o f the stu d y w ith o u t
j c r i t i c a l l y d e c r e a s in g th e in fo r m a tio n g e n e r a te d .
S p e c i f i c a l l y , th e stu d y was d e sig n e d t o answer th e
J
jfo llo w in g q u e s t io n s :
i
; 1. W ill fre q u en cy o f s t u t t e r i n g in c r e a s e f o l l o w i n g
i I
in c r e a s e d i n t e n s i t y o f c o n n o t a tiv e word meaning j
in th e n e g a t iv e d i r e c t i o n ?
I 2. W ill fr e q u e n c y o f s t u t t e r i n g be a s s o c i a t e d w ith
i n t e n s i t y o f c o n n o t a t iv e word meaning?
The e x p e r im e n ta l h y p o th e se s g e n e r a te d from the
f i r s t q u e s t io n were:
1. A s i g n i f i c a n t (p < .0 5 ) d i f f e r e n c e w i l l be
o b served betw een p r e - c o n d i t io n in g and p o s t
c o n d i t i o n i n g m easures o f s t u t t e r i n g fre q u en cy
in which n e u t r a l f l u e n t words as c o n d itio n e d
s t i m u l i are p a ir e d w ith n e g a t iv e s t u t t e r e d words
as th e u n c o n d itio n e d s t i m u l i (C o n d itio n E ) .
2. No s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e (p > .0 5 ) w i l l be
o b serv ed betw een p r e - c o n d i t io n in g and p o s t
c o n d it io n in g m easures o f s t u t t e r i n g freq u en cy
f o r th e c o n t r o l s i t u a t i o n in which n e u t r a l
f l u e n t words as c o n d it io n e d s t i m u l i are p a ir ed
w ith n e u t r a l s t u t t e r e d words as th e u n co n d i
tio n e d s t i m u l i (C o n d itio n F ) .
3. No s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e (p > .0 5 ) w i l l be
ob served betw een p re-m easu res and p o st-m e a su r e s j
o f s t u t t e r i n g fr e q u e n c y fo r the c o n t r o l s i t u a - j
i ;
I t i o n in which n e u t r a l f l u e n t words are n ot
f
; p a ir e d w ith a u d ito r y s t i m u l i (C o n d itio n T ) .
- - 5
4. Frequency o f s t u t t e r i n g w i l l d i f f e r s i g n i f i -
i c a n t l y among the m easures o f d i f f e r e n c e f o r the
i
t h r e e c o n d i t i o n s ,
j a. Frequency o f s t u t t e r i n g w i l l be s i g n i f i -
i c a n t ly (p < .0 5 ) g r e a t e r fo r C o n d itio n E
t
than f o r C o n d itio n T.
b. Frequency o f s t u t t e r i n g w i l l be s i g n i f i
c a n t l y (p < .0 5 ) g r e a t e r fo r C o n d itio n E
than f o r C o n d itio n F.
The e x p e r im e n ta l h y p o t h e s is g e n e r a te d from the
secon d q u e s t io n was:
5 . For each s u b j e c t , a s i g n i f i c a n t l y Cp < .0 5 )
g r e a t e r fr e q u e n c y o f s t u t t e r i n g w i l l occur on
words o f n e g a t iv e c o n n o t a t iv e meaning than w i l l
occur on words o f n e u t r a l c o n n o t a t iv e m eaning.
Im portance o f the Study
Few r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t s have e x p lo r e d sem a n tic dim en
s i o n s o f sp ee ch as c a u s a l f a c t o r s in p r e c i p i t a t i n g moments
o f s t u t t e r i n g . No r e s e a r c h has been r e p o r te d t h a t e x p lo r e d
.the r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een s t u t t e r i n g and word m eaning. The
I
Ip au city o f r e s e a r c h d e f i n e s th e need f o r e x p l o r a t i o n in the
area o f s t u t t e r i n g and c o n n o t a tiv e word meaning. The im
p o rta n ce o f t h i s need i s g iv e n added w e ig h t when one con
s i d e r s : (1) the n e c e s s i t y o f sp ee ch as a c o n d it io n f o r
j
s t u t t e r i n g ; (2 ) the numerous i n f e r e n c e s made t o word
'meaning as a p r e c i p i t a t i n g agent fo r s t u t t e r i n g ; and, (3)
i
I th e p le t h o r a o f r e s e a r c h in s t u t t e r i n g . In a d d i t io n , r e -
i
j
J s u its from th e p r e s e n t stu d y co u ld : (1 ) p r o v id e data f o r
i
i p r e d ic t io n and c o n t r o l o f s t u t t e r i n g moments; (2) y i e l d
I
i
i im p li c a t io n s f o r f u t u r e r e s e a r c h ; and, (3) c o n t r ib u t e to
i
(r e se a r c h m ethodology by p r o v id in g means to c o n t r o l word
! ■
jmeaning as a p o s s i b l e co n fou n d in g v a r i a b l e in f u t u r e
r e s e a r c h .
CHAPTER I I |
' i
i
: i
REVIEW OF LITERATURE j
I
i
The p u rp ose of t h i s s e c t i o n i s t o r e v ie w c r i t i c a l l y j
th e r e l e v a n t l i t e r a t u r e on: Cl) c o n n o t a t i v e word meaning;
(2 ) s t u t t e r i n g as r e l a t e d to word m eaning; and, ( 3 ) c o n d i
t io n in g o f s t u t t e r i n g .
!
i
i
C o n n o ta tiv e Word Meaning !
C o n n o ta tiv e word meaning has a s p e c i f i c a t t r i b u t e : ;
i
i
th e meaning o f a p a r t i c u l a r word to th e sp e a k e r . The e x a c t j
i
n a tu re o f t h i s a s s o c i a t i o n has been e x p la in e d o n ly t h e o r e t i - j
c a l l y a lth o u g h d a ta c o l l e c t e d appear to su p p o rt a m ed iation -!
i
a l p r o c e s s (O sgood, S u c i, and Tannenbaum, 1 9 5 7 ). A ccord in g j
to t h i s b e h a v io r a l th e o r y , l i n g u i s t i c sym bols evoke th e same
r e a c t i o n s (o r f r a c t i o n a l p o r t io n t h e r e o f ) as t h e s i g n i f i - j
c a t e . Meanings of s ig n s o r i g i n a t e from th e co n co m ita n t j
i
p a i r i n g s o f th e s ig n to th e s i g n i f i c a t e , w ith p a r t i c u l a r !
|
p a i r i n g s v a ry in g among i n d i v i d u a l s . The p r e s e n t r e v ie w of j
i
i
c o n n o t a t iv e word m eaning, how ever, w i l l be l i m i t e d to th e j
i
measurement and c o n d it io n in g of meaning r e g a r d l e s s o f th e j
i
t h e o r e t i c a l model used t o e x p la in th e s i g n - s t i m u l u s / s i g n - i
resp o n se p r o c e s s . j
8
Measurement of Meaning
i
Osgood, S u c i , and Tannenbaum (1 9 5 7 ) d e v is e d an i n -
Jstrum ent c a l l e d th e Sem antic D i f f e r e n t i a l by which m eanings I
: i
could be q u a n t i f i e d u s in g s e v e n - p o i n t , b i p o l a r , a d j e c t i v e j
; !
^ sc a le s. j
The l o g i c o f se m a n tic d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n as r e l a t e d to j
{
j
word meaning i s as f o l l o w s - Word meaning i s com prised o f j
j
many d im e n sio n s- A s e t o f s e v e n - p o i n t , b i p o l a r , a d j e c t i v e
j
s c a l e s i s d eterm in ed as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f a p a r t i c u l a r d i - j
i
i
m en sion. The s u b j e c t i s p ro v id e d w ith a word to be d i f f e r - !
e n t i a t e d and a s e r i e s of a d j e c t i v e p a ir s by which to do i t . i
For each word, th e d i r e c t i o n o f th e s c a l e r e sp o n s e and i t s j
1
i n t e n s i t y a r e d e ter m in e d . Thus, meaning o f a word i s d e - j
j
f in e d o p e r a t i o n a l l y as t h o s e r e s p o n s e s s p e c i f i e d by a s e r i e s
o f d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g judgm ents on th e s c a l e s e t s .
Osgood and h i s a s s o c i a t e s e x t r a c t e d th r e e dominant j
I
j
d im e n sio n s a c c o u n tin g fo r 50 per c en t of t h e t o t a l variancerj
f
r
e v a l u a t i v e ; p o te n c y ; and, a c t i v i t y . The f a c t o r s on the i
I
e v a l u a t i v e d im en sion w ere th e p u r e s t in f a c t o r lo a d in g and ;
I
accou nted fo r 68 per c e n t o f th e common v a r ia n c e - The good-!
bad, p le a s a n t - u n p l e a s a n t s c a l e s w ere found to be r e p r e se n ta -l
i
t i v e of th e e v a l u a t i v e d im en sio n - j
i
\
C o n d itio n in g o f Word Meaning i
i
A p le t h o r a o f c o n s i s t e n t e v id e n c e has been p r e se n te d
i n d i c a t i n g th a t c o n n o t a t iv e word meaning i s c l a s s i c a l l y
jcondit io n a b le ( S t a a t s and S t a a t s , 1957; S t a a t s , S t a a t s and
i
H ig g s , 1958; S t a a t s and S t a a t s , 1958; S t a a t s , S t a a t s and
Heard, 1959; S t a a t s , S t a a t s , Heard and Nim s, 1959; S t a a t s ,
i i
■ I
S ta a ts and Heard, 1960; S t a a t s and Crawford, 1962; S t a a t s , j
I
IS ta a ts, F i n l e y and M inke, 1963; Hare, 1964; Insko and Oakes,j
j
1966; M i l l e r , 1966a; M ille-r, 1966b; P h e la n , 1 9 6 7 ). j
i
In th e i n t e r e s t o f c l a r i f i c a t i o n , a r e v ie w o f each j
I
stu d y w i l l n o t be r e p o r t e d . R ath er, a s y n t h e s i s w i l l be j
p r e s e n te d o f c o n c e p ts found in common w ith s p e c i f i c r e f e r - ]
ence t o : ( 1 ) the c l a s s i c a l c o n d i t i o n i n g paradigm ; ( 2 ) raeth-j
i
o d o l o g i c a l p r o c e d u r e s ; and, ( 3 ) f i n d i n g s r e l e v a n t to th e j
p r e s e n t i n v e s t i g a t i o n . j
A ccord in g to S t a a t s ( 1 9 6 4 ) , meaning can be c o n d i- j
tio n e d to words by means o f r esp o n d en t c o n d it io n in g p r o c e - |
d u r e s. Based upon H u llia n p r i n c i p l e s ( H u ll, 1943) and their!
e x t e n s io n to th e a rea o f la n gu ag e by Osgood ( 1 9 5 3 ) , th e d e - j
velopm ent and change i n word meaning i s viewed by S t a a t s as |
t
f i t t i n g th e c l a s s i c a l c o n d i t i o n i n g paradigm in the fo llo w in g )
I
manner. A word i s a c o n d itio n e d s tim u lu s and meaning i s a
c o n d itio n e d r e s p o n s e . The word (CS) comes to e l i c i t meaning
(CR) by b e in g p a ir e d w ith a s t im u lu s (UCS) t h a t a lr e a d y j
j
e l i c i t s the r e s p o n s e (UCR). |
I
E x ten d in g th e p r i n c i p l e s o f resp on d en t c o n d it io n in g j
t o h ig h e r -o r d e r c o n d i t i o n i n g , a word (CS) i s used as a UCS |
i
i n c o n d i t i o n i n g a r e sp o n s e t o y e t a new v e r b a l s t i m u l u s . j
j
)Based upon t h i s r a t i o n a l e , S t a a t s (1 9 5 7 ) and h i s a s s o c i a t e s I
d e v e lo p ed a p r o c e d u r a l method, th e r e s u l t s from w hich i n d i
c a te d th e o c cu rren ce o f h ig h e r -o r d e r c o n d i t i o n i n g o f word
;meaning. The c o n d it io n e d s t i m u l i (C S s), n e u t r a l words--o-r
1 I
n o n sen se s y l l a b l e s , were p a ir e d s e p a r a t e l y w ith u n c o n d i
t i o n e d s t i m u l i (UCSs), a group o f E n g lis h words w ith in t e n s e
common e v a l u a t i v e m eaning. The u n c o n d itio n e d s tim u lu s r e
s p o n s e s (UCRs) were d eterm in ed by m arkings at the e n d p o in ts
ion the e v a l u a t i v e s c a l e s t o the UCSs. The c o n d itio n e d r e -
i
sp o n ses (CRs) were measured by the markings at the endpoints;
i
on th e e v a l u a t i v e s c a l e s to th e CSs. j
i
In th e r e v ie w o f the l i t e r a t u r e , the r e s u l t s o f i
7 I
s t u d i e s by S t a a t s and S t a a t s (1 9 5 8 ); S t a a t s , S t a a t s and !
Heard (1 9 6 0 ); In sk o and Oakes (1 9 6 6 ); M ille r (1966a) and !
P helan (1967) have su p p o rted the use o f th e c l a s s i c a l c o n d i
t i o n i n g paradigm to e x p l a i n th e p ro ced u res employed by
S ta a ts (1 9 5 7 ) . Other r e p o r te d f i n d i n g s (H are, 1964, and
M i l l e r , 1966a) have g e n e r a te d some q u e s t io n c o n c e r n in g
S t a a t s ’ m ethodology as f i t t i n g w it h in the framework o f r e
spondent c o n d i t i o n i n g . The i s s u e r a i s e d , how ever, i s pu rely
an academic one r e l a t i n g p roced u res t o a p a r t i c u l a r p a ra
digm. The f a c t rem ains th a t th e p roced u res fo rm u la te d by
; |
S t a a t s d id produce a change in b e h a v io r .
S t u d ie s th a t i n v e s t i g a t e d th e c o n d i t i o n i n g o f co n
n o t a t i v e word meaning employed s i m i l a r m e th o d o lo g ic a l p ro - j
;c e d u r e s. Some i n v e s t i g a t i o n s used the t r a c e method fo r j
! j
j p r e s e n t a t io n o f the CS and UCS. F o llo w in g t h i s method, th e
11
!
[ s u b j e c ts were p r e s e n te d w it h th e CS p r o j e c t e d on a sc r e e n
|
[for one secon d . The CS was rem oved, f o llo w e d in f i v e s e c -
ionds by th e UCS p r e s e n te d a u d i t o r i l y . Other s t u d i e s u se the!
j
d e la y e d method. The CS was p r o j e c t e d on th e s c r e e n , f o l - j
; I
j
lowed im m e d ia te ly by th e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f th e UCS. The CS j
rem ained on th e s c r e e n from th r e e to ten se c o n d s . In most i
|
i
s t u d i e s , th e s u b j e c t r e p e a te d th e UCS word. The tim e i n - j
t e r v a l betw een t r i a l s ranged from one t o f i v e s e c o n d s . j
i
Most e x p erim en ts employed t h r e e to f i v e n e u tr a l
i
s t im u lu s words or n o n se n se s y l l a b l e s , w ith o n ly two n e u t r a l !
words or n o n se n se s y l l a b l e s s e r v in g as th e CSs. In order toj
en su re t h a t g e n e r a l iz e d meaning se rv e d as th e UCS to e l i c i t
1
the CR, r a th e r than a s s o c i a t i o n o f a CS w ith a p a r t i c u l a r j
UCS, th e UCSs and CSs were p r e s e n t e d random ly. Anywhere
from -tw o to t h i r t y c o n d i t i o n i n g t r i a l s were em ployed, d e -
i
pending upon th e p a r t i c u l a r n a tu re o f th e s tu d y . !
!
The r e p o r te d r e s e a r c h on th e c o n d i t i o n i n g o f con
n o t a t i v e word meaning has d e l i n e a t e d s e v e r a l c r i t i c a l f i n d - j
in g s p e r t i n e n t t o th e m e th o d o lo g ic a l p r o c e d u r e s d e s c r ib e d !
t
in Chapter I I I o f t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n . j
E v a lu a tiv e d im e n sio n . Most o f th e i n v e s t i g a t i o n s I
j
u t i l i z e d o n ly th e s c a l e s e t s r e p r e s e n t in g th e e v a l u a t i v e d i- |
j
J
m ension as a m easure o f c o n d it io n in g s i n c e t h i s d im en sion :
i
i
accou n ted fo r th e g r e a t e s t amount of v a r ia n c e in word mean- I
i n g . M i l l e r (1 9 6 6 a ) found th a t th e g o od -b ad , p l e a s a n t -
u n p le a sa n t s c a l e s , as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sam ples of th e
12
; e v a l u a t i v e d im e n s io n , w e r e e q u i v a l e n t i n ter m s o f t h e c o n s e -
iq u en ces o f c o n d i t i o n i n g .
F req u en cy o f u s a g e . Koen ( 1 9 6 2 ) r e p o r t e d t h a t no
d i f f e r e n c e e x i s t e d b e tw e en f r e q u e n c y o f word u s a g e and i n - j
j
t e n s i t y o f m eaning g i v e n t o th e w ord. !
C o n tr o l g r o u p s . In a r e v i e w o f l i t e r a t u r e on seman-j
t i c g e n e r a l i z a t i o n o f c l a s s i c a l l y c o n d i t i o n e d r e s p o n s e s , I
|
F e a th e r (1 9 6 5 ) em p h a siz e d t h e n eed t o i n c l u d e a p ro p er c o n - ;
' (
t r o l so t h a t o b s e r v e d ch a n g e i s n o t m e r e ly a g e n e r a l r e - j
s p o n s i v e n e s s to s t i m u l a t i o n ( i . e . , p s e u d o c o n d i t i o n i n g ) w hen;
|
:CSs a r e p r e s e n t e d n o n s y s t e m a t i c a l l y . j
|
R e in fo r c e m e n t and e x t i n c t i o n . In s k o and Oakes
I ■ II I I I I ■ II ■ ■ |. I — ■■ II !
I
( 1 9 6 6 ) found t h a t g r e a t e r ch a n g e i n i n t e n s i t y o f m eaning |
l
o c c u r r e d under c o n d i t i o n s o f 100 per c e n t r e i n f o r c e m e n t . j
l
I
The CR, h o w ev e r, was h i g h l y r e s i s t a n t t o e x t i n c t i o n . j
Number o f t r i a l s . I n t e n s i t y o f t h e CR i n c r e a s e d
w it h a g r e a t e r number o f c o n d i t i o n i n g t r i a l s ( S t a a t s and
j
S t a a t s , 1 9 5 8 ) .
Summary i
The r e v i e w o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e p r e s e n t e d e v id e n c e
j
t h a t : ( 1 ) c o n n o t a t i v e word m eaning c o u ld be m easured using!
*
t h e e v a l u a t i v e d im e n sio n s c a l e s o f th e S em a n tic D i f f e r e n - j
t i a l ; and, ( 2 ) s c a l e r e s p o n s e s c o u ld be changed by c l a s s i c a l !
c o n d i t i o n i n g p r o c e d u r e s .
1 3
I S t u t t e r i n g and Word M eaning
In 1 9 3 7 , J o h n so n and K n o tt r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e r e was
l
a marked te n d e n c y f o r l o c i o f moments o f s t u t t e r i n g t o r e - ;
main c o n s t a n t i n s u c c e s s i v e r e a d i n g s , w h ic h t h e y term ed th e j
|
c o n s i s t e n c y e f f e c t . The c o n s i s t e n c y f i n d i n g s a l s o have been-
o b s e r v e d w i t h i n t h e e x p e c t a n c y paradigm (J o h n so n and j
A in s w o r th , 193 8; P e i n s , 1 9 6 1 ) . A r e p l i c a t i o n o f t h e o r i g i -
t
n a l s tu d y le d J o h n son and I n n e s s (1 9 3 9 ) to c o n c lu d e t h a t j
d i f f e r e n t w ords c a r r y m eaning and s i g n i f i c a n c e w h ich v a r y j
among i n d i v i d u a l s t u t t e r e r s . From t h i s p o s t u l a t e , two d i - J
|
r e c t i o n s o f r e s e a r c h e n d e a v o r s f o l l o w e d : s t u t t e r i n g as a j
f u n c t i o n o f t h e p r o p o s i t i o n a l i t y o f s p e e c h ; and, s t u t t e r i n g
as a f u n c t i o n o f a f f e c t i v e s p e e c h c o n t e n t .
P r o p o s i t i o n a l i t y of S p eech and
S t u t t e r i n g
P r o p o s i t i o n a l i t y i s a term em ployed to d e s i g n a t e t h e
r e l a t i v e d e g r e e o f co m m u n ic a tiv e im port o f an u t t e r a n c e and/1
or r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e s u b j e c t . The g r a m m a tica l fu n c tio n !
i
o f s t u t t e r e d words i s one form o f p r o p o s i t i o n a l i t y . Brown j
( 1 9 3 7 ) , Hahn ( 1 9 4 2 ) , and H ejn a (1 9 5 5 ) d e m o n str a te d c o n s i s - !
I
t e n t l y t h a t s t u t t e r i n g f r e q u e n c y i n c r e a s e d i n t h i s se q u e n c e :
c o n j u n c t i o n s ; a r t i c l e s ; p r o n o u n s; p r e p o s i t i o n s ; a d v e r b s;
v e r b s ; a d j e c t i v e s ; and , nouns— .In a r a t i n g s c a l e s t u d y o f j
c o n d i t i o n s under w h ic h s t u t t e r i n g i s r ed u ced or a b s e n t , j
B l o o d s t e i n ( 1 9 5 0 ) r e p o r t e d s t u t t e r i n g was red u ced f o r alm ostj
i
a l l s u b j e c t s under t h e c o n d i t i o n o f r e d u c e d co m m u n ica tiv e
14.
i
|
j r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . E ise n s o n and H orow itz ( 1 9 4 5 ) found l a r g e
j
p e r c e n ta g e d i f f e r e n c e s in th e fr e q u e n c y o f s t u t t e r i n g b e -
; i
t w e e n th e c o n d it io n of r e a d in g n o n se n se p a s s a g e s e l e c t i o n s j
and th e c o n d i t i o n o f r e a d in g m e a n in g fu l m a t e r ia l.' The read-j
i i
in g of m ea n in g fu l m a t e r i a l c o n ta in e d th e g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e j
of s t u t t e r i n g moments. Q u arrin gton ( 1 9 6 5 ) , S c h l e s i n g e r , j
j
F o r t e , F ried and Melkman ( 1 9 6 5 ), and Sod erberg (1 9 6 ? ) r e - j
I
p o r ted s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s b etw een s t u t t e r i n g and i n - j
j
fo rm a tio n v a lu e o f words ( e s t im a t e d from th e p r e d i c t a b i l i t y j
!
o f th e w o r d s ). j
r
The r ep o rted f i n d i n g s on p r o p o s i t i o n a l i t y o f sp eech
i
as r e l a t e d to s t u t t e r i n g s u g g e s t a r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een con-j
I
n o t a t i v e meaning and s t u t t e r i n g . From th e e x p la n a tio n o f |
i
th e a s s o c i a t i o n o f th e word to th e speaker ( i f s t u t t e r i n g j
i s a f u n c t i o n o f word m e a n in g ), i t would be p r e d ic t e d th a t j
|
c o n n o t a t iv e word meaning would be d e c r e a se d fo r n o n se n se j
m a t e r ia l and, c o n s e q u e n t ly , a d e c r e a s e in s t u t t e r i n g would j
be o b se r v e d . I t would a l s o be p r e d ic t e d t h a t i n t e n s i t y o f j
j
word meaning would be str o n g e r fo r l e x i c a l p a r t s o f sp ee ch
i
than fo r f u n c t i o n a l p a r t s o f s p e e c h , thus p rod u cin g more I
s t u t t e r i n g on th e l e x i c a l p o r t i o n s . The f i n d i n g s r e p o r te d
in the l i t e r a t u r e su p p ort t h e s e p r e d i c t i o n s .
A f f e c t i v e Speech Content
and S t u t t e r in g
A f f e c t , as d e fin e d in th e l i t e r a t u r e , i s e i t h e r j
^synonymous w ith or a p ro d u ct of em otion . The assum p tion '
i 15
j
ju n d e rly in g a f f e c t i v e s p e e c h c o n t e n t i s t h e o c c u r r e n c e o f an
j i n t e r n a l e v e n t as a r e s p o n s e t o word s t i m u l i . As an i n t e r - j
| j
iven in g v a r i a b l e , t h i s i n t e r n a l e v e n t becom es t h e s t i m u l u s
! j
1 j
jto e l i c i t th e s t u t t e r i n g r e s p o n s e . j
; M oore, S o d e r b e r g , and P o w e l l ( 1 9 5 2 ) and Moore (1954):
■reported t h a t t h e s e v e r i t y o f s t u t t e r i n g was g r e a t e r when
; s u b j e c t s sp oke on t o p i c s o f p a r e n t s , f a m i l y , s p e e c h , and
V
:f e a r s than on t o p i c s o f s c h o o l , w ork, h o p e s , and good t im e s .
B a r d r ic k ( 1 9 5 6 ) r e p o r t e d t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r
e n c e s o c c u r r e d in t h e a v e r a g e amount o f s t u t t e r i n g b etw een
t h e r e a d in g of t h e e x p e r im e n t a l p a s s a g e and e a ch c o n t r o l
p a s s a g e . The e x p e r im e n t a l p a s s a g e t h a t c o n s i s t e d o f d e r o g a
t o r y s t a t e m e n t s a b ou t s t u t t e r e r s c o n t a in e d more s t u t t e r i n g .
The c o n t r o l p a s s a g e s w ere: ( 1 ) num bers; ( 2 ) non-
p r o p o s i t i o n a l m a t e r i a l ; and, ( 3 ) n e u t r a l p r o p o s i t i o n a l
m a t e r i a l . The d e r o g a t o r y s t a t e m e n t s were n o t p la c e d w i t h i n
a c o n t e x t o f o th e r s e n t e n c e s . T h is method o f p a s s a g e p r e s
e n t a t i o n p r o b a b ly in c r e a s e d t h e s u b j e c t s ’ a w a r en ess o f c o n
t e n t change from p a s s a g e t o p a s s a g e and, c o n s e q u e n t l y , may
have b e e n a c r i t i c a l v a r i a b l e a f f e c t i n g t h e r e s u l t s .
Boyer ( 1 9 5 8 ) , i n a s tu d y u t i l i z i n g d e la y e d a u d it o r y
■feedback w it h s t u t t e r i n g s u b j e c t s , found t h a t t h e r e a d in g
jtime f o r s e n t e n c e s jud ged u n p le a s a n t was s i g n i f i c a n t l y
jlonger th a n t h a t f o r p l e a s a n t l y ju d ged s e n t e n c e s w h ic h , in I
i !
jturn, was s i g n i f i c a n t l y lo n g e r than t h e tim e r e q u ir e d fo r
i
■reading s e n t e n c e s judged t o be n e u t r a l .
j A t a n g e n t i a l stu d y p r o v id e s a d d i t io n a l in fo r m a tio n
i
|
i r e l a t i v e to a f f e c t i v e sp eech c o n te n t and s t u t t e r i n g . In a
istudy of r e a c t i o n tim es betw een s t u t t e r e r s and n o n s t u t t e r
e r s , Adams and D i e t z e (1965) r ep o rted t h a t both groups were j
slow er to respond to word s t i m u l i c o n n o tin g a f f e c t . Reac- |
■tion tim e was measured from th e c e s s a t i o n o f th e stim u lu s !
word to the i n i t i a t i o n o f w r i t t e n word a s s o c i a t e r e s p o n s e s , j
»
R e a ctio n tim es to a l l words were slow er fo r s t u t t e r e r s than ;
fo r n o n s t u t t e r e r s . The s t u t t e r i n g group had s i g n i f i c a n t l y {
lon g er r e a c t i o n tim es to n e g a t iv e a f f e c t - c o n n o t e d w ord s-th an
j
to n e u t r a l words. •
The r e p o r te d r e s e a r c h on s t u t t e r i n g as a f u n c t io n of!
i
a f f e c t i v e sp eech c o n ten t w arran ts th e f o llo w in g c r i t i c i s m s : !
( l ) word s t i m u l i were presumed to p r e c i p i t a t e an unmeasured
i n t e r n a l a f f e c t i v e ( e m o tio n a l) s t a t e ; ( 2 ) o p e r a t io n a l d e f i - j
n i t i o n s or d e te r m in a tio n s of a f f e c t i v e - s t a t e s did not u t i —
l i z e th e e x p e rim en ta l p o p u la t io n s , but were in f e r r e d from ■
experim en ter assum p tion s or from other p o p u la tio n s ; and, !
(3 ) th e s t u d i e s e it h e r employed g e n e r a l iz e d , ind ep en dent !
1
v a r i a b l e s ( e . g . , sp ontan eou s sp eech and p a ssa g e r e a d in g s ) I
or d id n ot measure s t u t t e r i n g as th e dependent v a r i a b l e . j
I t i s o b v io u s, however, th a t the f i n d in g s from thesej
!
s t u d i e s do s u g g e s t a r e l a t i o n s h i p betxveen s t u t t e r i n g and j
word m eaning. As th e sp eech c o n te n t was judged to vary a f
f e c t i v e l y , d i f f e r e n c e s in s t u t t e r i n g s e v e r i t y were observed.!
| C o n d itio n in g o f S t u t t e r i n g
i
Only one stu d y concerned w ith c o n d it i o n i n g o f mo-
!
i
=ments o f s t u t t e r i n g was found in th e l i t e r a t u r e . The r e - j
; i
p o r t e d stu d y has p a r t i c u l a r r e le v a n c e to th e f l u e n c y controls
C o n d it io n F o f t h e p r e s e n t i n v e s t i g a t i o n . P e t e r s and
Simonson ( i 9 6 0 ) r e p o r te d a stu d y on a s s o c i a t i v e l e a r n i n g . |
: !
U sin g a memory drum p r e s e n t a t i o n , words o f low s t u t t e r i n g j
i
p o t e n t i a l were p a ir e d w ith o th e r words of low s t u t t e r i n g j
!
p o t e n t i a l or h ig h s t u t t e r i n g p o t e n t i a l . M easures of s t u t - j
t e r i n g fr e q u e n c y and le a r n in g w ere made p r io r t o drum p r e s - ;
e n t a t i o n , a f t e r f i f t y e x p o s u r e s , and a f t e r one hundred e x
p o s u r e s . R e s u lt s i n d ic a t e d t h a t le a r n in g occu rred and t h a t ;
words le a r n e d in a s s o c i a t i o n w ith words o f h ig h s t u t t e r i n g
p o t e n t i a l had a s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e in fre q u en cy o f s t u t - j
i
|
t e r i n g a f t e r one hundred e x p o s u r e s . Words le a r n e d i n a s s o - j
i
i
c i a t i o n w it h words o f low s t u t t e r i n g p o t e n t i a l d id n o t have j
a s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e in s t u t t e r i n g . A ls o , no s i g n i f i c a n t !
j
d i f f e r e n c e s were ob served betw een th e two groups o f words
( i . e . , t h o s e p a ir e d w it h words o f h ig h s t u t t e r i n g p o t e n t i a l i
and t h o s e p a ir e d w ith words o f low s t u t t e r i n g p o t e n t i a l )
a f t e r f i f t y e x p o s u r e s , a lth o u g h t h e r e was a ten d e n c y i n th e i
d i r e c t i o n o f th a t found a f t e r one hundred e x p o s u r e s . In j
a n a ly z in g words w ith h ig h s t u t t e r i n g p o t e n t i a l , t h e r e were !
i
no d i f f e r e n c e s in fr e q u e n c y o f s t u t t e r i n g among th e b e f o r e
e x p o su re , f i f t y - e x p o s u r e , and o n e-h u n d re d -e x p o su r e c o n d i-
: !
•t io n s . '
! 18
i
I
| The p u rp o se o f t h i s c h a p te r h as been t o r e v ie w t h e
ip e r t in e n t l i t e r a t u r e i n t h e s p e c i f i c a r e a s o f : ( 1 ) c o n n o t-
ia tiv e word m eaning; ( 2 ) s t u t t e r i n g as r e l a t e d to word mean
in g ; and, ( 3 ) c o n d i t i o n i n g o f s t u t t e r i n g . T h is r e v ie w was
l i m i t e d f u r t h e r to t h o s e r e p o r t s w hich r e l a t e d d i r e c t l y t o
th e t h e o r e t i c a l b a s e s or m e th o d o lo g ie s employed i n t h i s i n
v e s t i g a t i o n .
i
i
i
i
I
j
i
i
i
f
i
| CHAPTER I I I
I METHODS AND PROCEDURES
i
I
O verview o f the D esign
i The p r e se n t e x p e r im e n ta l stu d y was d e sig n ed to t e s t
‘the h y p o th e s is t h a t fre q u en cy o f s t u t t e r i n g i s a fu n c t io n
io f c o n n o t a t iv e word meaning. O p e r a tio n a lly , t h i s stu d y i n
v e s t i g a t e d the e f f e c t o f change in the e v a lu a t iv e s c a l e
resp on se o f word meaning upon freq u en cy o f s t u t t e r i n g .
S in g le s u b j e c t m easures o f the a s s o c i a t i o n betw een f r e q u e n
cy o f s t u t t e r i n g and i n t e n s i t y o f s c a l e r e sp o n se s were i n
tended to p rovid e a d d i t io n a l t e s t s o f th e h y p o t h e s is .
A W ithin S u b je c ts d e s ig n was employed w ith each
; s u b je c t r e c e i v in g th r e e trea tm en t c o n d it io n s f o llo w in g
I t r a i n in g p ro ced u res. Order e f f e c t s o f trea tm en t p r e s e n
t a t i o n were c o n t r o l l e d by a L a tin Square. F o llo w in g the
■ d e sig n form at o f S t a a t s and S t a a t s ( 1 9 5 7 ), c l a s s i c a l co n
d i t i o n i n g procedures were employed to produce a change in
! s c a l e r e sp o n se s fo r th e e x p e rim en ta l c o n d it io n . A p propri-
I ate f lu e n c y and time c o n t r o ls were a p p lie d . D if f e r e n c e
imeasures o f s c a l e r e sp o n se s and freq u en cy o f s t u t t e r i n g
;between p r e - and p o s t-tr e a tm e n t c o n d it io n s were o b ta in e d .
19
|By o p e r a t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n , c o n n o t a t i v e word m ean ings w ere j
I th e o b s e r v a b le phenomena o f s c a l e judgm ent r e s p o n s e s . Thus,'
change i n word m eaning s e r v e d as th e in d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e !
I ' i
jand fr e q u e n c y o f s t u t t e r i n g was th e d e p e n d en t v a r i a b l e .
i |
| j
S u b j e c t s
j N in e m ale s u b j e c t s were s e l e c t e d from th e a v a i l a b l e :
p o p u l a t i o n i n v o l v e d i n s t u t t e r i n g tr e a t m e n t or r e s e a r c h a t
th e C e n te r f o r t h e S tu d y o f S p ee c h and H ea r in g a t th e
U n i v e r s i t y o f S o u th e r n C a l i f o r n i a . T w elve s u b j e c t s were
c o n t a c t e d by t e l e p h o n e or by p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w and were
asked t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n a r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t . They were t o l d :
(1 ) th e n a tu r e o f th e e x p e r im e n t was c o n c e r n e d w ith s t u t
t e r i n g , memory, and word m eaning; ( 2 ) th e tim e r e q u ir e d
would be a maximum o f t h r e e h o u r s; (3 ) th e p r o c e d u r e s
would n o t i n v o l v e th e u se o f a p h y s i c a l l y p a i n f u l s t i m u l u s ,
a lth o u g h some s o c i a l l y u n a c c e p t a b le words would be employed;;
and, (4 ) s u b j e c t s w ould be p a id t h r e e d o l l a r s and, i f
I r e c e i v i n g t r e a t m e n t a t th e C e n t e r , f e e s would be r ed u ced
a c c o r d i n g l y . P a r e n t a l c o n s e n t was o b t a in e d f o r th e two
im inors i n v o l v e d i n th e s t u d y . A l l s u b j e c t s a g reed t o p a r -
i t i c i p a t e i n th e e x p e r im e n t . H owever, t h r e e s u b j e c t s d id
; ■ i
n o t s t u t t e r when r e a d in g and, c o n s e q u e n t l y , w ere e l i m i n a t e d ;
s i n c e , w i t h i n th e fram ework o f th e s t u d y , i t c o u ld n o t be
j s
jd e m o n stra te d t h a t th e s u b j e c t s d id in d e e d s t u t t e r . Four o f
!th e n in e s u b j e c t s s u b s e q u e n t l y r e f u s e d p e r s o n a l paym ent.
2 1
The n i n e s u b j e c t s ran ged in age from 18 t o 26 y e a r s w ith a
i
jmean age o f 2 2 . 5 .
| M a t e r i a l s and A p p aratu s
| The t r a i n i n g p r o c e d u r e s (memory t a s k ) em ployed f i v e
I words as th e v i s u a l s t i m u l i and te n words as th e a u d i t o r y
:s t i m u l i (S e e A p p en d ix A ). The words w ere s e l e c t e d a r b i
t r a r i l y by th e e x p e r im e n t e r . In th e e x p e r im e n t a l p r o c e -
jd u r e s, 167 words were s e l e c t e d f o r judgm ent and r e a d in g
(S e e A p pend ix B ) . The word s e l e c t i o n was b a sed upon: (1 )
p r o b a b i l i t y o f n e u t r a l or n e g a t i v e r e s p o n s e as d e te r m in e d
by s t u t t e r i n g and n o n s t u t t e r i n g s u b j e c t s from p r e v io u s
p i l o t p r o j e c t s ; (2 ) c o n t r o l f o r number o f s y l l a b l e s ; and,
(3 ) c o n t r o l f o r fr e q u e n c y o f u sa g e where su ch c o u ld be
d e t e r m in e d . F r e q u e n c ie s o f u sa g e c o u ld n o t be d e te r m in e d
f o r th e s o c i a l l y u n a c c e p t a b le w o rd s. H owever, as c i t e d
; p r e v i o u s l y , s c a l e r e s p o n s e s t o words are in d e p e n d e n t o f
t h e i r f r e q u e n c y o f u sa g e (Koen, 1 9 6 2 ) . The words w ere
!p r e s e n t e d in p a rag rap h form i n th e c o n t e x t o f o t h e r ( a l -
ith o u g h l i n g u i s t i c a l l y u n r e l a t e d ) words s i n c e C u r le e (1 9 6 7 )
|fo u n d s t u t t e r i n g t o be m ark ed ly r ed u ced or a b s e n t when
' i s o l a t e d words were p r e s e n t e d .
The e x p e r im e n t a l method u t i l i z e d c l a s s i c a l c o n d i
t i o n i n g p r o c e d u r e s . CSs were p r e s e n t e d v i s u a l l y and UCSs
;were g i v e n a u d i t o r i l y . The CS words and th e v i s u a l s t i m u l i
!i n th e t r a i n i n g and e x p e r im e n t a l t a s k s were p r i n t e d on fo u r
[inch by s i x in c h , w h ite card s w ith t h r e e - e i g h t h s in c h ,
I !
■black, neon t y p e . In order t o reduce e x tr a n e o u s n o i s e s
| i
land fo c u s th e a u d ito r y s i g n a l , th e UCSs and a u d ito r y t r a i n - I
; . i
i t
ling words were p r e s e n te d to the s u b j e c t through earp hones byj
! ' :
ja m icrophone c o n n e c te d to a P honic M irror in s tr u m e n t.
A l l v e r b a l r e sp o n s e s by th e s u b j e c t were record ed
jusing a W ollen sak tap e r e c o r d e r , Model T -1500.
; Ju u gin g s h e e t s c o n ta in e d s i x s e t s o f two, b i p o l a r , i
; i
s e v e n - p o i n t a d j e c t i v e s c a l e s ; good-bad and p l e a s a n t -
u n p le a s a n t. Thus, s i x words were p r e s e n te d on one page to
be d i f f e r e n t i a t e d by r e s p o n s e s on the s c a l e s . S c a le end
p o i n t s were v a r ie d to e li m in a t e a r e sp o n se made as a r e s u l t
o f s e q u e n t i a l o r d e r . A sample judgment s h e e t i s p r e s e n te d
in A ppendix C.
T r a in in g P ro ced u res
The exp erim en t took p la c e at th e C enter f o r th e
■Study o f Speech and H earin g . Each s u b j e c t underwent the
i t r a in in g and e x p e r im e n ta l p ro ced u res i n d i v i d u a l l y . The
I
s u b j e c t was s e a t e d at a t a b l e and was t o l d th a t th e e x p e r i -
j
jment was concerned w ith r e c a l l o f word t y p e s . He a l s o was
i !
c a u tio n e d th a t th e stu d y was n ot concerned w ith i n t e l l i
g e n c e , r e a d in g a b i l i t y , p e r s o n a l i t y f a c t o r s , or sp eed in
ju d g in g .
|
I A s e t o f i n s t r u c t i o n s fo r ju d g in g was g iv e n t o each !
; I
^subject (See Appendix D ) . The i n s t r u c t i o n s were m o d ifie d
iv e r s io n s o f th o s e employed f o r the Sem antic D i f f e r e n t i a l
i i
(O sgood, S u c i , and Tannenbaum, 1 9 5 7 , p. 5 8 ) . S u b j e c t s were |
I i
Ip e r m itte d t o ask q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n in g th e i n s t r u c t i o n s . |
! The s u b j e c t was p r e s e n t e d w i t h f i v e words t o ju d g e
ion th e s c a l e s o f g ood -b ad and p l e a s a n t - u n p l e a s a n t . The j
I f i v e ju d g ed words w ere p r e s e n t e d on c a r d s . F o llo w in g p r e s - I
i e n t a t i o n o f e a c h c a r d , an a u d it o r y s t i m u l u s word s e l e c t e d j
i a r b i t r a r i l y by th e e x p e r im e n te r was p r e s e n t e d . Each ju d ged |
:Word was p a ir e d o v er two t r i a l s w i t h one o f th e t e n a u d i-
i
( ;
t o r y s t i m u l u s words i n su ch a manner t h a t : (1 ) no jud ged
word was p a ir e d w it h th e same unjudged- word more th an on ce;
and, (2 ) no two ju d g ed words were p r e s e n t e d i n s e q u e n c e .
The s u b j e c t was ask ed t o r e c a l l th e v i s u a l l y p r e s e n t e d
words and t o s e l e c t c o r r e c t a u d i t o r i l y p r e s e n t e d words from
two a l t e r n a t i v e , th o u gh s i m i l a r l y r e l a t e d , c h o i c e s ( g i v e n
i n A p pend ix A ).
’ E x p e r im e n ta l P r o c e d u r e s
i The s u b j e c t was p r e s e n t e d w it h 167 words t o judge
Ion th e two s c a l e s . The s u b j e c t was f u r t h e r i n s t r u c t e d n o t
!t o mark th e s c a l e s f o r words he d id n o t know. F o llo w in g
; th e c r i t e r i a u sed by M i l l e r ( 1 9 6 6 a ) , a word was c o n s i d e r e d
i n e g a t i v e i f th e a v e r a g e s c a l e r a t i n g was g r e a t e r th an 5 . 5 .
IN eu tra l e v a l u a t i o n was d e f i n e d as an a v e r a g e s c a l e r a t i n g ;
■between 3 . 5 and 4 . 5 . The s u b j e c t th e n r ea d th e 167-w ord i
| l i s t f i v e t i m e s . The s u b j e c t was r e q u e s t e d t o om it a word
j 1
|he c o u ld n o t pron ou n ce and p r o c e e d t o th e r e a d in g o f th e
jnext word. S u b s e q u e n t ly , words t h a t were n o t e v a lu a t e d on
I
;the s c a l e s a n d /o r t h a t were n o t read were e l i m i n a t e d from
;the l i s t f o r th e p a r t i c u l a r s u b j e c t . For e a c h r e a d in g , the
lord er o f th e p ara g ra p h s was v a r ie d t o c o n t r o l fo r t h e r e -
id u c t io n o f s t u t t e r i n g moments as a f u n c t i o n o f c o n tin u o u s
r e a d in g (W in e a te , 1 9 6 8 ) . A word was c o n s i d e r e d s t u t t e r e d
:i f a moment o f s t u t t e r i n g o c c u r r e d on th e word in a t l e a s t
jfour o f th e f i v e r e a d i n g s . S i m i l a r l y , f l u e n c y was d e f i n e d
as th e o c c u r r e n c e o f a moment o f s t u t t e r i n g i n no more than
one o f th e f i v e r e a d i n g s . A lth o u g h a r b i t r a r i l y s e l e c t e d by
th e e x p e r im e n t e r , th e u se o f f i v e r e a d in g s and th e c r i t e r i a
em ployed t o d e f i n e f l u e n t / s t u t t e r e d words w ere s u f f i c i e n t l y
s t r i n g e n t t o r ed u c e chance v a r i a t i o n and t o perm it c a t e
g o r i z a t i o n . In o t h e r w ords, a moment o f s t u t t e r i n g m ight
occu r on a word d u r in g th e f i r s t r e a d in g b u t not on s u b s e
q u en t r e a d i n g s . A c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f th e word as s t u t t e r e d
would n o t be w a r ra n ted a lt h o u g h a s t u t t e r e d c l a s s i f i c a t i o n
iwould be g i v e n i f o n ly one r e a d in g were em p loyed . Or, the
word may be s t u t t e r e d th e same number o f t im e s as sp ok en
f l u e n t l y . In t h i s c a s e , i t would be d i f f i c u l t to c a t e
g o r i z e th e word a c c u r a t e l y as s t u t t e r e d or f l u e n t .
! From th e judgm ents and r e a d in g s o f e a ch s u b j e c t ,
:n e u t r a l f l u e n t w ords, n e g a t i v e s t u t t e r e d w o r d s, and n e u t r a l
: s t u t t e r e d words were s e l e c t e d f o r th e t h r e e tr e a tm e n t con -
i
i d i t i o n s :
I 25
I
i E CSs ( n e u t r a l f l u e n t w o r d s)_____
UCSs ( n e g a t i v e s t u t t e r e d w ords)
i ;
| P CSs ( n e u t r a l f l u e n t w o r d s) j
I UCSs ( n e u t r a l s t u t t e r e d w ords)
i T CSs ( n e u t r a l f l u e n t w ords) !
! No UCSs
i '
j C o n d it io n E c o n s i s t e d o f p a i r i n g f i v e f l u e n t n e u t r a f
words (CSs) p r e s e n t e d v i s u a l l y w ith s t u t t e r e d n e g a t i v e words:
i(UCSs) p r e s e n t e d a u d i t o r i l y by th e e x p e r im e n t e r o v er twenty-;
i f i v e t r i a l s . The CSs were e x p o se d f o r a d u r a t i o n o f two
s e c o n d s , f o l l o w e d i n one se c o n d by th e UCS p r e s e n t a t i o n . A
two se c o n d i n t e r v a l o c c u r r e d b e tw e e n th e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f th e
UCS and e x p o su r e o f th e n e x t CS word. Two v i s u a l s t i m u l u s
w ord s, w hich were p a ir e d w it h o t h e r n e u t r a l f l u e n t w o rd s,
were a l s o p r e s e n t e d . The CSs were g i v e n i n a random p a t t e r n
by s h u f f l i n g th e s t i m u l u s c a r d s . The UCSs d id n o t f o l l o w a
s y s t e m a t i c p a t t e r n o f p r e s e n t a t i o n .
The CSs and UCSs em ployed i n C o n d it io n E were
jud ged on th e two s c a l e s im m e d ia te ly f o l l o w i n g th e t w e n t y -
■five c o n d i t i o n i n g t r i a l s . In th e p o s t - c o n d i t i o n i n g ju d g -
iment p r o c e d u r e s , th e CSs and UCSs were embedded w i t h i n th e
j c o n t e x t o f o th e r words w hich w ere n o t em ployed in any o f
; th e t h r e e c o n d i t i o n s o f th e e x p e r im e n t . F o llo w in g th e
;p o s t - c o n d i t i o n i n g ju d g m en ts, s u b j e c t s read th e CSs f i v e
(tim es and f r e q u e n c y o f s t u t t e r i n g was d e te r m in e d f o r each
(word. In th e p o s t - c o n d i t i o n i n g r e a d in g , CS words were
[p la c e d w i t h i n th e same c o n t e x t as was u sed t o o b t a in
j 26 I
I l
I ■ ■ 1
{fr e q u e n c y o f s t u t t e r i n g i n th e p r e - c o n d i t i o n i n g r e a d i n g s . j
i
i
C o n d it io n F was th e f l u e n c y c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n em-
j - ;
{ployed t o d e te r m in e th e e f f e c t o f s t u t t e r e d words p a i r e d i n j
I j
{ a s s o c i a t i o n w it h f l u e n t w o r d s. In C o n d it io n F, f i v e n eu tra lj
{words (CS) p r e s e n t e d v i s u a l l y were p a ir e d w it h n e u t r a l stut-j.
; te r e d words (UCS) p r e s e n t e d a u d i t o r i l y over t w e n t y - f i v e
{ t r i a l s . The p r o c e d u r e s f o r CS-UCS p r e s e n t a t i o n and p o s t -
;t r e a tm e n t m easu res u sed f o r C o n d it io n F were th e same as
t h o s e u t i l i z e d f o r C o n d it io n E.
The T C o n d it io n was th e tim e c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n
w h ic h was u sed t o a s c e r t a i n th e d e g r e e o f g e n e r a l r e s p o n
s i v e n e s s t o s t i m u l a t i o n . F iv e n e u t r a l f l u e n t words were
p r e s e n t e d v i s u a l l y o v er t w e n t y - f i v e t r i a l s . No a u d it o r y
s t i m u l i w ere p a ir e d w it h th e v i s u a l s t i m u l i .
C o n d it io n s E and F f o l l o w e d a c l a s s i c a l c o n d i t i o n
i n g paradigm : n e u t r a l f l u e n t words were th e c o n d i t i o n e d
• s t i m u l i ; . ajad, n e g a t i v e s t u t t e r e d words (C o n d it io n E) or
n e u t r a l s t u t t e r e d words ( C o n d it io n F) were th e u n c o n d i
t i o n e d s t i m u l i . C o n d it io n s F and T s e r v e d as a p p r o p r ia t e
{ c o n t r o l s f o r th e e x p e r i m e n t a l C o n d it io n E.
f I
I n t e r j u d g e R e l i a b i l i t y
From th e ta p e r e c o r d e d r e s p o n s e s , tw e n ty words o f
e a c h s u b j e c t were s e l e c t e d a t random. F o llo w in g a s e t o f
I 1
j i n s t r u c t i o n s (A p p en d ix E) and f a m i l i a r i z a t i o n w it h th e
J ' !
1
| s u b j e c t ’ s v o i c e , two ju d g e s c o u n te d moments o f s t u t t e r i n g
; 27
i
|on e a ch o f th e n in e s e t s o f tw e n ty w o r d s. B oth ju d g e s were
j s e l e c t e d from th e D epartm ent o f C om m unicative D i s o r d e r s at
The U n i v e r s i t y o f S o u th e r n C a l i f o r n i a . One ju d ge was a
jfemale g r a d u a te s t u d e n t who had e x t e n s i v e c l i n i c a l e x p e r i
e n c e in d e a l i n g w it h s t u t t e r i n g b e h a v i o r . The o t h e r ju d ge
was a male f a c u l t y member who was i n v o l v e d in s t u t t e r i n g
'r e s e a r c h . The ju d g e s were i n s t r u c t e d t o u se t h e i r own p e r
s o n a l c r i t e r i a t o d e f i n e moments o f s t u t t e r i n g w it h th e
^ fo llo w in g e x c e p t i o n : a l l a t t e m p ts made by th e i n d i v i d u a l to
sa y a g i v e n s y l l a b l e were t o be c o u n te d as one moment o f
s t u t t e r i n g . The j u d g e s ' r e s u l t s were c o r r e l a t e d w i t h t h o s e
o f th e e x p e r im e n t e r i n order t o d e te r m in e th e e x p e r i m e n t e r 's
r e l i a b i l i t y i n d e t e c t i n g moments o f s t u t t e r i n g .
S t a t i s t i c a l D e s ig n
T a b le 1 l i s t s th e n a tu r e o f th e d a ta o b t a i n e d , th e
s t a t i s t i c a l p r o c ed u r e u sed t o a n a ly z e th e d a t a , and th e
ic o r r e s p o n d in g s t a t i s t i c . The .0 5 l e v e l o f c o n f i d e n c e was
a c c e p t e d as s i g n i f i c a n t in a l l a n a l y s e s .
TABLE 1
NATURE OF DATA OBTAINED, STATISTICAL METHOD,
AND STATISTIC EMPLOYED IN
ANALYSES OF THE DATA
Data O btained S t a t i s t i c a l Method S t a t i s t i c
S c a le r e sp o n se d i f
f e r e n c e s p r e - and
p o s t - t r e a t m e n t fo r
C o n d itio n s E, F, T
F requency o f s t u t
t e r i n g d i f f e r e n c e s
p r e - and p o s t
tr e a tm e n t f o r
C o n d itio n s E, F, T
D i f f e r e n c e s among
d i f f e r e n c e m easures
o f s t u t t e r i n g f r e
quency fo r a l l
c o n d it io n s
A s s o c i a t i o n betw een
i n t e n s i t y o f s c a l e
r e s p o n s e s and f r e
quency o f s t u t t e r i n g
p r e -tr e a tm e n t
I n te r ju d g e r e l i a b i l i t y
S i m i l a r i t y o f s c a l e
r e s p o n s e s among
s u b j e c t s
W ilcoxon M atched-
P a ir s Signed-R anks
T e s t ( S i e g e l , 1956)
t _ t e s t fo r p a ir ed
o b s e r v a t io n s
(H ays, 1963)
One-way a n a l y s is
o f v a r ia n c e
Kolm ogorov-Sm irnov
Two-Sample T e s t
( S i e g e l , 1956)
I n t r a c l a s s Cor
r e l a t i o n
( G u ilf o r d , 1956)
P e r c e n ta g e
c o m p ila t io n s
D,X‘
cc
. CHAPTER IV j
i
! i
: i
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION I
C o n n o ta tiv e Word Meaning Change [
|
In order to t e s t th e e x p e r im e n ta l h y p o t h e s i s , a !
n e c e s s a r y p r e r e q u i s i t e was a dem onstrated change i n s c a le ]
: i
r e s p o n s e . S in c e th e SD s c a l e s a re b e s t d e f in e d on o r d in a l j
j
m easu res, a non p ara m etric s t a t i s t i c a l t e s t was employed to j
t e s t d i f f e r e n c e s betw een p r e - and p o s t - c o n d i t i o n i n g s c a le
r e s p o n s e s . The W ilcoxon M a tc h e d -P a irs Signed-R anks Test was:
employed as th e s t a t i s t i c a l method recommended by S ie g e l
(1 9 5 6 , p. 7 5 ) . T his t e s t c o n s id e r s n o t o n ly th e d i r e c t i o n !
!
but a l s o th e m agnitude of ob served d i f f e r e n c e s . ■
j
i
N e u tr a l F lu en t Words j
i
i
Summaries o f th e a n a ly s e s o f d i f f e r e n c e s c o r e s of
word meaning f o r th e n e u t r a l f l u e n t words among the three
c o n d i t i o n s are p r e s e n te d in T a b le s 2 , 3, and 4 in Appendix
F. The o b ta in ed T o f O f o r d i f f e r e n c e s c o r e s ra n g in g b e
tween 0 and 12 fo r C o n d itio n E w ith N=8 was s i g n i f i c a n t a t ;
I
th e .0 1 l e v e l o f c o n f id e n c e . T h is f i n d in g i s i n d i c a t i v e o f I
a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e betw een p r e -t r e a t m e n t s c a l e '
jresp on ses and p o s t - t r e a t m e n t s c a le r e s p o n s e s . The change
I
jwas in th e d i r e c t i o n of th e n e g a tiv e p o le as h y p o t h e s iz e d .
IThus, s c a l e r e s p o n s e s were c o n d itio n e d by the m ethodology
.d e sc rib ed in Chapter I I I .
In C o n d itio n F, fo u r of the n in e s u b j e c t s had d i f - j
fe r e n c e sco res o f 0 . C on seq u en tly, an N of 5 was too sm a ll |
i
I
for th e data to b e analyzed s t a t i s t i c a l l y . The la r g e numberj
of no d i f f e r e n c e s c o r e s , how ever, confirm ed th e n u ll hyp oth-’
e s i s t h a t no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s e x is t e d betw een s c a l e |
r e sp o n s e s prior t o and f o l lo w in g trea tm en t p r o c e d u r e s. Thatj
i s , th e p a ir in g o f n e u tr a l f l u e n t words w ith n e u t r a l s t u t - |
i
tered words had no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t upon th e s c a l e r e - j
I
sponses t o the n e u t r a l f l u e n t words; t h e s e words con tin u ed
to be judged as n e u t r a l a f t e r tr e a tm e n t. |
j
For C o n d itio n T, f i v e of the n in e s u b j e c t s had d i f - j
fe r e n c e sc o r e s o f 0 for th e f i v e n e u t r a l words. S im ila r tc
C o n d itio n F, the N was reduced to fo u r which was too sm a ll
for the data to be s t a t i s t i c a l l y a n a ly z e d . However, th e i
n u ll h y p o th e s is was a ccep ted that no d i f f e r e n c e s e x is t e d be-!
tween s c a l e r e s p o n s e s due to tim e. The data from C o n d itio n j
T dem onstrated t h a t the change in s c a l e r e sp o n s e s observed j
l
in C o n d itio n E was not a g e n e r a l r e s p o n s iv e n e s s to s t im u la - i
i
tio n C p s e u d o c o n d itio n in g ). j
N e g a tiv e S tu tte r e d Words
A n alyses o f the d i f f e r e n c e s between p r e - and
p o s t - t r e a t m e n t s c a l e r e s p o n s e s f o r th e n e g a t i v e s t u t t e r e d
words i n C o n d it io n E i s p r e s e n t e d i n T a b le 5 o f A p p e n d ix D.
The o b ta in e d T o f 12 w it h N= 8 was n o t s i g n i f i c a n t a t th e .05j
i
I
l e v e l o f c o n f i d e n c e . The n u l l h y p o t h e s i s t h a t no d i f f e r - I
i
ene-e-s e x i s t e d b e tw e en p r e - t r e a t m e n t s c a l e r e s p o n s e s and j
f
p o s t - t r e a t m e n t r e s p o n s e s fo r n e g a t i v e s t u t t e r e d w ords was
a c c e p t e d . T h is fin d ijig _ i n d i c a t e d t h a t backward c o n d i t i o n i n g
d id n o t o c c u r - Thus, c l a s s i c a l c o n d i t i o n i n g o f s c a l e r e - j
s p o n s e s o f n e u t r a l f l u e n t words i n C o n d it io n E r e s u l t e d in !
change o f c o n n o t a t i v e word m ean in g. |
N e u tr a l S t u t t e r e d Words j
S u b j e c t s ’ d i f f e r e n c e s c o r e s b etw een p r e - and p o s t
t r e a tm e n t s c a l e r e s p o n s e s f o r n e u t r a l s t u t t e r e d words in j
C o n d it io n F a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b le 6 o f A p p en d ix D. The |
I
n u l l h y p o t h e s i s t h a t no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s r e s u l t e d
i
from t h i s p a i r i n g was a c c e p t e d s i n c e f o u r o f th e n in e d i f - !
j
f e r e n c e s were e q u a l t o 0 . T h is N was to o s m a ll f o r s t a t i s - \
t i c a l a n a l y s i s o f th e d a t a , \
j
Summary j
C l a s s i c a l c o n d i t i o n i n g o f s c a l e r e s p o n s e s to words j
d e m o n stra te d a change in c o n n o t a t i v e word m ean in g. S p e c i f i - ;
c a l l y , a n e g a t i v e s c a l e r e s p o n s e (C R ).w as produced when n e u
t r a l f l u e n t words CCS) w ere p a ir e d w it h n e g a t i v e s t u t t e r e d
words CUCS). No e v id e n c e o f p s e u d o c o n d i t i o n i n g or backward \
c o n d i t i o n i n g was o b s e r v e d . !
i S t u t t e r in g
( ---------------------
i
■ Frequency of s t u t t e r i n g was measured by c o u n tin g the
Inumber of s t u t t e r i n g moments which occurred on._each word
used in th e th r e e treatm en t c o n d it io n s . M easures o f f r e - j
’ I
I
quency o f s t u t t e r i n g were made p r io r to and f o llo w in g th e j
treatm en t c o n d i t i o n s . Summaries o f th e d ata ob ta in ed are |
p r e se n te d in T a b les 7, S, and 9. The t_ t e s t fo r p a ir e d ob
s e r v a t io n s (Hays, 1963, p . 333) was th e s t a t i s t i c a l method
jused to t e s t d i f f e r e n c e s between p r e - and p o s t - tr e a t m e n t j
measures o f s t u t t e r i n g freq u en cy fo r each c o n d it io n - In ;
a d d it io n , a one-way a n a l y s i s o f v a r ia n c e was a p p lie d to t h e !
d i f f e r e n c e s c o r e s in freq u en cy o f s t u t t e r i n g among a l l con- j
d i t i o n s .
i
j
C o n d itio n E j
A t_ v a lu e of 1 .1 2 5 was o b ta in ed fo r th e d i f f e r e n c e
s c o r e s in s t u t t e r i n g freq u en cy fo r th e n e u t r a l f l u e n t words
in C o n d itio n E. Employing a o n e - t a i l e d t e s t w ith e ig h t d e - j
g r e e s o f freedom , t h i s v a lu e was not s i g n i f i c a n t at th e .05 |
l e v e l of c o n fid e n c e . T h e r e fo r e , ex p erim en ta l H y p o th esis 1
was not su p p orted . An i n c r e a s e in freq u en cy o f s t u t t e r i n g !
was not observed f o llo w in g an in c r e a s e in i n t e n s i t y o f con- j
j
n o t a t i v e word meaning. j
TABLE 7 j
1
I
I
j
PRE-TREATMENT AND POST-TREATMENT MEASURES j
i
I
OF MOMENTS OF STUTTERING ON NEUTRAL S
FLUENT WORDS FOR CONDITION E j
i
i
!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - r
i
S u b je c ts P re-T reatm en t P o st-T r e a tm e n t D i f f e r e n c e !
SI 2 4 2
S2 1 0 -1
S3 1 0 -1
S4 3 0
-3
S5 0 0 0
S6 0 3 3
S7 0 S 8
SS 3 0
-3
S9 0 11 11
T o t a ls 10 26 16
34
j
j
i
|
!
TABLE 8 j
i
PRE-TREATMENT AND POST-TREATMENT MEASURES j
OF MOMENTS OF STUTTERING ON NEUTRAL
FLUENT WORDS FOR CONDITION F
■
S u b je c ts P re-T rea tm en t P o st-T r e a tm e n t D i f f e r e n c e
SI 4 2 -2
S2 0 0
o
S3 1 0 -1
S4 4 0 -4
S5 0 0 0
S6 0 0 0
S7 4 6 2
S8 1 2 1
S9 2 _7 __5
T o t a ls 16 17 1
i
i
1
i
j
j 35
j
I
i
: ' i
; |
i
t
: I
I
TABLE 9 !
i
I
PRE-TREATMENT AND POST-TREATMENT MEASURES j
OF MOMENTS OF STUTTERING ON NEUTRAL j
FLUENT W ORDS FOR CONDITION T ■
j
S u b je c ts P re-T r eatment P o st-T r e a tm e n t D i f f e r e n c e
SI 2 3
i
i
i i
i
S2 1 1
!
0
S3 0 0 0
S4 1 1 0
S5 1 1 0
S6 0 0
0 1
S7 0 2
1
2 !
1
S8 0 0
0
S9 3 3 _ o ;
T o t a l s 8 11
i
3 !
1
i
I
I 36
I
jC o n d ition F
|
| A t_ v a lu e o f .129 was o b ta in ed f o r d i f f e r e n c e s in
t
[freq u en cy o f s t u t t e r i n g fo r th e n e u t r a l f l u e n t words in
; i
-C on d ition F. Employing a o n e - t a i l e d t e s t w ith e i g h t d e - j
; 1
g r e e s o f freedom , t h i s v a lu e was not s i g n i f i c a n t a t th e .0 5 j
; !
l e v e l . Thus, H y p o th e sis 2 was su p p o r te d . The a p p r o p r ia t e - i
n e s s o f C o n d itio n F as a c o n t r o l was co n firm e d . j
1
i
; i
C o n d itio n T !
I
A _t v a lu e o f 1 .3 7 4 was o b ta in ed fo r d i f f e r e n c e s in j
fre q u en cy o f s t u t t e r i n g fo r n e u t r a l f l u e n t words o f C ondi- j
i
t i o n T. T h is v a lu e was not s i g n i f i c a n t at th e .0 5 l e v e l o f j
i
c o n f id e n c e , em ploying a o n e - t a i l e d t e s t w ith e ig h t d e g r e e s !
o f freedom . Thus, H y p o th e sis 3 was su p p o r te d . A change in I
j
s t u t t e r i n g fre q u en cy as a r e s u l t o f tim e was not o b se r v e d . I
I
A l l C o n d itio n s
A summary o f the a n a l y s i s o f v a r ia n c e fo r th e d i f - j
f e r e n c e s in f r e q u e n c ie s o f moments of s t u t t e r i n g among a l l j
c o n d i t i o n s i s p r e s e n te d in T a b le 10. S in c e th e F r a t i o i s !
l e s s than 1 . 0 , the s t a t i s t i c a l n u l l h y p o t h e s is i s a c c e p t e d , j
That i s , no d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t e d among t h e s e tr e a tm e n t popu- I
|
l a t i o n s . T h e r e fo r e , H y p o th e sis 4 i s n o t su pp orted by th e j
f i n d i n g s . ' !
i
I ...... 37
i
j
|
I
i
s
TABLE 10 |
i
SUM M ARY OF THE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE j
OF THE DIFFERENCE SCORES
TABLES 7 , 8 AND 9
FOR
Source SS d f M S F
Treatm ents
(betw een groups)
1 4 .8 2 7 .5 0 .745 *
Error
( w it h in groups)
2 4 4 .4 24 1 0 .2
T o ta ls 2 5 9 .2 26
*Not s i g n i f i c a n t (p > .0 5 )
38
S i n g l e S u b j e c t A n a ly s e s
o f A s s o c i a t i o n
i A lth o u g h an i n c r e a s e i n c o n n o t a t i v e word m eaning d id
! - l
.not r e s u l t in a c o n c o m ita n t i n c r e a s e in fr e q u e n c y o f s t u t
t e r i n g , i t i s q u i t e p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e two v a r i a b l e s s t i l l
m igh t be r e l a t e d . T h e r e f o r e , a c u m u la t iv e f r e q u e n c y d i s - j
t r i b u t i o n was made f o r th e two v a r i a b l e s o b s e r v e d : ( 1 ) mo
m ents o f s t u t t e r i n g ; and, ( 2 ) s c a l e r e s p o n s e s . D ata f o r '
! f
f
i
b o th d i s t r i b u t i o n s w ere c o l l e c t e d p r i o r t o p r e s e n t a t i o n o f j
j
tr e a t m e n t c o n d i t i o n s . The K o lm ogorov-S m irn ov Two-Sample S
T e s t was a p p l i e d t o t h e d a ta i n ord er to d e t e r m in e t h e j
a g reem en t b e tw e e n th e fwo d i s t r i b u t i o n s a s recommended by
i
S i e g e l ( 1 9 5 6 , p . 1 3 1 ) . The D v a l u e s fo r e a ch o f th e n i n e i
s u b j e c t s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b le 1 1 . Em ploying o n e - t a i l e d '
t e s t s f o r l a r g e s a m p le s , o n ly one D v a lu e ( S I ) was s i g n i f i - j
j
c a n t beyond th e .0 5 l e v e l o f c o n f i d e n c e r e l a t i v e t o th e Y?
d i s t r i b u t i o n w it h d f = 2 . T h e r e f o r e , H y p o t h e s is 5 was n o t
su p p o r te d by t h e f i n d i n g s .
i
S u p p lem en tary F in d in g s !
|
S t u t t e r i n g on UCSs j
A t_ t e s t f o r p a i r e d o b s e r v a t i o n s was a p p lie d t o t h e }
d i f f e r e n c e m ea su r es o f s t u t t e r i n g fr e q u e n c y f o r t h e s t u t - !
i
t e r e d n e g a t i v e w ords (UCSs— C o n d it io n E) and t h e s t u t t e r e d j
i
n e u t r a l words ( U C S s --C o n d itio n F) p r i o r t o and f o l l o w i n g the}
itre a tm e n t p r o c e d u r e s . U nequal sa m p le s from each s u b j e c t
39
TABLE 11 j
i
i
D VALUES FOR KOLMOGOROV-SMIRNOV TEST:
ASSOCIATION BETWEEN MOMENTS OF !
\
STUTTERING AND SCALE RESPONSES i
j
i
S u b je c t D x 2
SI 0 .5 9 6 3 7 .3 4 *
S2 .2 0 5 5 .8 6
S3 .05 5 0 .3 1 6 8
S4 . 130 2 .4 7
S5 .0 7 6 0 .2 3 8 0
S6 .090
0 .6 9 1 2
S7 .051 0 .3 5 6 4
S8 .0 1 2 0 .0 1 2 8
S9 .226 5 .9 7
* p < .0 0 1
A l l o th e r s n o t s i g n i f i c a n t (p > .0 5 )
40
Iwere u sed to s t a t i s t i c a l l y a n a ly z e th e UCS d a ta fo r moments
I
‘o f s t u t t e r i n g , s i n c e : Cl) th e number o f UCS words v a r ie d
ifrom s u b j e c t to s u b j e c t ; and, ( 2 ) p o s t - c o n d i t i o n i n g m eas- j
u r e s o f s t u t t e r i n g fre q u en cy were n o t o b ta in e d fo r e v e r y
| UCS.
For C o n d itio n E, a t v a lu e o f 2 .2 0 was o b ta in e d b e
tween p r e - c o n d i t i o n i n g and p o s t - c o n d i t i o n i n g measures o f
fr e q u e n c y o f s t u t t e r i n g on th e n e g a t i v e s t u t t e r e d w ords.
j
Employing a t w o - t a i l e d t e s t w it h e i g h t d e g r e e s o f freed om , I
t h i s v a lu e was n o t s i g n i f i c a n t a t th e .05 l e v e l o f c o n f i - ;
j
d en ce. j
i
For C o n d itio n F, a t _ v a lu e o f 3 .5 0 was ob ta in ed b e - i
tween p r e - c o n d i t i o n i n g and p o s t - c o n d i t i o n i n g m easures o f j
s t u t t e r i n g fr e q u e n c y on th e n e u t r a l s t u t t e r e d w ords. T h is
i
v a lu e was s i g n i f i c a n t at th e .01 l e v e l , em ploying a tw o- j
t a i l e d t e s t w ith e i g h t d e g r e e s o f freedom . Thus, a s i g n i f -
t
ic a n t d e c r e a s e in moments o f s t u t t e r i n g was observed fo r j
i
j
the UCSs employed i n C o n d itio n F. j
j
I n te r j u d g e R e l i a b i l i t y
t
F requency co u n ts o f moments o f s t u t t e r i n g w ere c o l - J
i
l e c t e d from two ju d g e s and th e e x p erim en ter as d e s c r ib e d in j
: i
Chapter I I I . F o llo w in g th e recommendation o f G u ilfo r d j
(1 9 5 6 , p . 2 80 ) fo r i n t r a c l a s s c o r r e l a t i o n , a r cc v a lu e o f j
.90 was o b ta in e d . This v a lu e was s u f f i c i e n t l y high to c o n - J
firm th e e x p e r im e n te r 's r e l i a b i l i t y in ju d g in g moments o f
stuttering.
; S i m i l a r i t y o f S c a l e R e sp o n s e s
'Among S u b j e c t s
From t h e r e s p o n s e s on th e tw o s c a l e s f o r 167 w o r d s,
p e r c e n t a g e s w ere computed t o d e t e r m in e i f th e s c a l e r e
s p o n s e s w ere s i m i l a r among t h e n i n e s u b j e c t s - O nly 7 - 7 per !
j
c e n t o f th e w ords had th e same common v a lu e on b o th s c a l e s , j
i
"Using o n ly one s c a l e , t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f words h a v in g common j
!
i
v a lu e r o s e to 1 8 . 5 p e r c e n t . A lth o u g h most o f t h e v a r i a n c e !
among s u b j e c t s 1 r e s p o n s e s c o n s i s t e d o f d i f f e r e n c e s betw een
n e u t r a l and p o l a r r e s p o n s e s , i t was n o te d t h a t 2 0 . 9 per
i
c e n t o f a l l w ords had s c a l e r e s p o n s e s in o p p o s i t e d i r e c - I
t i o n s among th e s u b j e c t s .
In c o n c l u s i o n , th e f i n d i n g s from t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n i
d id n o t su p p o rt t h e c e n t r a l , e x p e r im e n t a l H y p o th e s e s 1, 4 , j
and 5 . T hese h y p o t h e s e s w e r e : I
[
1. A s i g n i f i c a n t (p < .0 5 ) d i f f e r e n c e w i l l b e ob- I
i
!
s e r v e d b etw een p r e - c o n d i t i o n i n g and p o s t
c o n d i t i o n i n g m ea su r es o f s t u t t e r i n g f r e q u e n c y j
>
f o r C o n d it io n E i n w h ich n e u t r a l f l u e n t w ords j
as c o n d i t i o n e d s t i m u l i a r e p a ir e d w i t h n e g a t i v e j
s t u t t e r e d w ords as u n c o n d it io n e d s t i m u l i .
i
4 . F req u en cy o f s t u t t e r i n g w i l l d i f f e r s i g n i f i - j
i
c a n t l y among p o s t - c o n d i t i o n i n g m easu res f o r th e
42
A s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r (p < .0 5 ) fre q u en cy o f
s t u t t e r i n g w i l l occur on words o f n e g a t i v e c o n
n o t a t i v e meaning than w i l l occur on words of
n e u t r a l c o n n o t a t i v e meaning b ased upon s i n g l e
s u b j e c t a n a ly s e s o f th e d a ta .
j
j
| CHAPTER V
|
| SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS
j
i
! Summary
i
The Problem
The purpose o f t h i s stu d y was t o f e s t th e h y p o th e
s i s th a t fr e q u e n c y o f s t u t t e r i n g i s a f u n c t i o n o f c o n n o ta
t i v e word m eaning. Two e x p e r im e n ta l q u e s t io n s were deduced
from th r e e t h e o r i e s o f s t u t t e r i n g th a t p o s i t t h a t sem a n tic
p r o p e r t i e s o f words are c a u s a l f a c t o r s i n the p r e c i p i t a t i o n
o f moments o f s t u t t e r i n g : (1) w i l l fr e q u e n c y o f s t u t t e r i n g
in c r e a s e f o l l o w i n g an in c r e a s e d i n t e n s i t y o f c o n n o t a t iv e
ivord meaning in the n e g a t i v e d i r e c t i o n ; and, (2) w i l l f r e
quency o f s t u t t e r i n g be a s s o c i a t e d w ith words o f n e g a t iv e
i
jc o n n o ta tiv e word meaning? W ith in the framework o f the d e -
i
jsign t h a t employed sem a n tic d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n to measure
i
c o n n o t a t iv e word meaning and c l a s s i c a l c o n d i t i o n i n g pro
c e d u r e s to change c o n n o t a t iv e word meaning r e s p o n s e s , the
jfo llo w in g h y p o th e se s were g e n e r a te d from t h e s e q u e s t io n s :
;(1) a s i g n i f i c a n t (p < .0 5 ) d i f f e r e n c e w i l l be ob served
ibetween p r e - c o n d i t i o n i n g and p o s t - c o n d i t i o n i n g m easures o f
i 44,
| |
• s t u t t e r i n g fr e q u e n c y f o r C o n d itio n E in w hich n e u t r a l fluent]
; |
iwords as c o n d it io n e d s t i m u l i are p a ir e d w ith n e g a t iv e s t u t - j
i •
r
jtered words as th e u n c o n d itio n e d s t i m u l i ; (2 ) no s i g n i f i c a n t
i ' |
id i f f e r e n c e (p > .0 5 ) w i l l be ob serv ed betw een p r e - i
i ;
■ c o n d itio n in g and p o s t - c o n d i t i o n i n g m easures o f s t u t t e r i n g i
Ifrequency f o r c o n t r o l C o n d itio n F in which n e u t r a l f l u e n t
: • " j
words as c o n d it io n e d s t i m u l i are p a ir e d w ith n e u t r a l s t u t
te r e d words as the u n c o n d itio n e d s t i m u l i ; (3) no s i g n i f i
ca n t d i f f e r e n c e (p > .0 5 ) w i l l be o b serv ed betw een p r e
m easures and p o st-m e a su r e s o f s t u t t e r i n g fre q u en cy f o r c o n
t r o l C o n d itio n T in w hich n e u t r a l f l u e n t words are n o t
p a ir e d w ith s t i m u l i ; (4 ) fr e q u e n c y o f s t u t t e r i n g w i l l d i f
f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y among p o s t - c o n d i t i o n i n g m easures f o r the
t h r e e c o n d i t i o n s ; and, (5) a s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r (p < .05):
fr e q u e n c y o f s t u t t e r i n g w i l l occur on words o f n e g a t iv e
c o n n o t a t iv e meaning than w i l l occur on words o f n e u t r a l
ic o n n o t a tiv e meaning based upon s i n g l e s u b j e c t a n a ly s e s o f
th e d a ta .
Method
Nine s t u t t e r i n g s u b j e c t s were asked t o judge 167
iwords on two, s e v e n - p o i n t , b i p o l a r , a d j e c t i v e e v a l u a t i v e
i
s c a l e s . Words h av in g an average s c a l e v a lu e betw een 3 .5
■and 4 .5 were d e fin e d as n e u t r a l and words h avin g an average j
1 i
; j
i s c a l e v a lu e betw een 5 .5 and 7 .0 were d e f in e d as n e g a t i v e . !
!S u b je c ts read the words f i v e tim es in p a ssa g e form and
| 45
jmoments o f s t u t t e r i n g on e a c h word w ere o b ta in e d . A word
!was con sid ered s t u t t e r e d i f a t l e a s t four moments of s t u t -
: i
t e r i n g occurred on that word during th e f i v e r e a d in g s . !
j
S i m i l a r l y , a f l u e n t word was d efin ed as one h a v in g no more !
i
than a s in g le moment of s t u t t e r i n g i n the" f i v e r e a d in g s. j
The ex p e rim en ta l proced ures fo llo w e d a c l a s s i c a l j
c o n d it io n in g paradigm . B ased upon e a c h s u b j e c t ' s p rev io u s
i
I
r e s p o n s e s , f i v e n e u t r a l words ( f l u e n t ) served as the c o n d i- j
i
tio n e d s t im u li (CS) and n e g a t iv e words ( s t u t t e r e d ) se rv e d j
j
as th e u n c o n d itio n e d s t i m u l i (UCS) f o r C on d ition E. The :
i
CSs were p r esen ted v i s u a l l y fo llo w e d by a u d ito r y p r e s e n t s - |
r
t i o n o f the UCSs ov er t w e n t y - f iv e t r i a l s . P r e s e n t a t i o n o f
CSs and UCSs f o llo w e d a random p a t t e r n . Two a p p ro p ria te
c o n t r o l c o n d itio n s were employed. For the f l u e n c y c o n t r o l I
|
C o n d itio n F, n e u t r a l f l u e n t words w ere paired w ith n e u t r a l j
j
s t u t t e r e d words. In the tim e c o n tr o l C o n d itio n T, n e u t r a l j
i
f l u e n t words were n o t p a ir e d w ith a u d ito r y s t i m u l i . P o s t - j
trea tm en t measures o f s c a l e r esp o n ses and freq u en cy o f stut-J
j
I
t e r i n g were determ ined fo r th e c o n d itio n e d and unconditioned!
s t i m u l i . Thus, t h i s study used a W ith in S u b je c ts d e s ig n j
w ith p r e s e n ta t io n o f trea tm en t c o n d it io n s c o u n terb a la n ced J
by a L a tin Square. Change i n sc a le resp o n ses c o n s t i t u t e d !
j
the independent v a r ia b le and freq u en cy of s t u t t e r i n g com- j
p r is e d the dependent v a r i a b l e . D i f f e r e n c e s betw een p r e - j
^treatment and p o s t - t r e a t m e n t measures were a n a lyzed fo r
s t a t i s t i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s . Based upon p r e -tr e a tm e n t d a ta , j
| th e d e g r e e o f a s s o c i a t i o n "between s c a l e r e s p o n s e s and f r e -
»•
!
iquency o f s t u t t e r i n g was o b ta in e d f o r each s u b j e c t .
|R e s u l t s
Word m ean in g. A p p ly in g th e W ilcoxon M a tc h e d -P a ir s
;Sign ed -R an k s T e s t , a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e (p < .0 1 ) was
found f o r th e s c a l e r e s p o n s e s b e tw e en p r e - c o n d i t i o n i n g and
p o s t - c o n d i t i o n i n g m easures o f th e CSs i n C o n d itio n E. No
o th e r s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were o b ser v ed f o r th e CSs in
th e c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n s or f o r th e UCSs i n C o n d it io n F and
C o n d it io n T.
S t u t t e r i n g . No s i g n i f i c a n t (p > .0 5 ) d i f f e r e n c e s
betw een p r e - t r e a t m e n t and p o s t - t r e a t m e n t m easures o f s t u t
t e r i n g fr e q u e n c y were found f o r n e u t r a l f l u e n t words among
any o f th e tr e a tm e n t c o n d i t i o n s u s i n g th e t t e s t fo r p a ir e d
o b s e r v a t i o n s . A p p ly in g a one-w ay a n a l y s i s o f v a r ia n c e to
th e d i f f e r e n c e m easures o f f r e q u e n c y o f s t u t t e r i n g among
a l l c o n d i t i o n s , no s i g n i f i c a n t (p > .0 5 ) d i f f e r e n c e s among
m easures o f s t u t t e r i n g fr e q u e n c y were fo u n d . A lth o u g h a
s i g n i f i c a n t d e c r e a s e in fr e q u e n c y o f s t u t t e r i n g was n o t
found on th e n e g a t i v e s t u t t e r e d words o f C o n d itio n E, a
s i g n i f i c a n t r e d u c t i o n (p < .0 1 ) i n moments o f s t u t t e r i n g
was o b se r v e d on th e n e u t r a l s t u t t e r e d words f o r c o n t r o l
C o n d it io n F.
The K olm ogorov-Sm irnov Two-Sample T e s t was a p p lie d
:t o th e p r e - t r e a t m e n t m easures f o r e a ch s u b j e c t i n ord er t o
t e s t fo r the degree o f a s s o c i a t i o n between s c a l e r e sp o n se s
and moments o f s t u t t e r i n g . A s i g n i f i c a n t (p < .0 5 ) a s s o c i
a t i o n ( i . e . , more moments o f s t u t t e r i n g occurred on words
h avin g n e g a t iv e s c a l e r e sp o n s e s than on words having neu
t r a l s c a l e r e s p o n s e s ) was found fo r o n ly one o f the n in e I
a n a ly s e s . j
\
i
I
|
C o n clu sio n s j
j
The r e s u l t s o f t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n su p p ort th e f o l - i
|
!
lo w in g c o n c lu s io n s : I
]
1. C l a s s i c a l c o n d it io n in g proced ures s u c c e s s f u l l y i
produced an in c r e a s e in i n t e n s i t y o f e v a lu a t iv e I
s c a l e r e sp o n s e s to words. That i s , p r e v io u s ly I
!
n e u t r a l words became c o n d itio n e d s t i m u l i fo r !
!
th e e l i c i t a t i o n o f the c o n d itio n e d n e g a t iv e I
j
i
v a lu e r e s p o n s e . j
!
2. No s i g n i f i c a n t in c r e a s e i n moments o f s t u t - j
]
t e r i n g occu rred su b seq u en t to an i n c r e a s e in j
the i n t e n s i t y o f s c a l e r e s p o n s e s .
i
3. S in g le s u b j e c t a n a ly s e s o f the data fo r nin e i
s u b j e c t s dem onstrated a s i g n i f i c a n t a s s o c i a - j
t i o n betw een s c a l e r e sp o n se s and moments o f !
i
s t u t t e r i n g fo r on ly one s u b j e c t . |
I m p lic a tio n s
I m p lic a t io n s o f — - [
The Main E f f e c t s |
i
The e x p e r im e n ta l h y p o th eses o f t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n j
i
were negated by th e r e s u l t s o b ta in e d . T h e r e fo r e , th e gen - I
e r a l h y p o th e s is th a t fre q u en cy o f s t u t t e r i n g i s a f u n c t io n j
I
o f c o n n o ta tiv e word meaning was not su p p o rted . W ithin the j
l i m i t a t i o n s o f t h i s stu d y , the r e s u l t s do not support the i
assum ption th a t c o n n o ta t iv e word meaning i s a c a u s a t iv e
[
f a c t o r in the p r e c i p i t a t i o n o f moments o f s t u t t e r i n g . A l
though t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n appears t o o f f e r d e f i n i t i v e means I
to a s c e r t a i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p between c o n n o ta tiv e word
meaning and s t u t t e r i n g , the p r e se n t study c e r t a i n l y does
not encompass a l l d im en sion s o f word meaning or ex h a u st a l l j
!
m e th o d o lo g ic a l v a r i a t i o n s . T h e r e fo r e , the l i m i t a t i o n s o f
t h i s stu d y are d is c u s s e d in the f o l lo w in g s e c t i o n s s in c e
I
the l i m i t a t i o n s have a d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p to the d egree o f j
g e n e r a l i z a t i o n which can be made from the r e s u l t s .
O b v io u sly , the c e n t r a l problems o f t h i s stu d y con
cern the o p e r a tio n a l d e f i n i t i o n o f c o n n o ta tiv e word m ean in g!
and the proced ures u t i l i z e d to m anipulate i t . C o n n o ta tiv e j
word meaning as an in t e r v e n in g v a r ia b le was d e fin e d as the j
s u b j e c t ' s r e sp o n se s to th e two s c a l e s good-bad and pleasant-]
u n p le a sa n t. The p e n c il-m a r k in g r e sp o n se s are m ea n in g less !
|
when c o n sid e r e d alon e and are tenuous when assumed to be j
a r e s u l t o f an i n t e r n a l i z e d e v e n t. I t must be r e a l i z e d j
jthat the i n t e r n a l e v e n t i s on ly h y p o th e siz e d and, t h e r e f o r e ,
|
i t would be ex tr em e ly d i f f i c u l t to dem onstrate th a t p ro- !
; I
;cedures u t i l i z e d to m anip ulate the independent v a r ia b le did j
ind eed c o n t r o l p o s s i b l e confounding s u b j e c t v a r i a b l e s . The j
i
^m ethodological problem i s compounded w it h in t h i s stu d y by j
: i
th e use o f a dependent v a r ia b le ( s c a l e r e sp o n s e s ) as an I
, i
i
ind ep en dent v a r i a b l e . In a d d it io n , only the e v a lu a t iv e j
dim ension o f c o n n o ta tiv e word meaning was m anipulated in j
t h i s stu d y and th a t dim ension o n ly in the n e g a tiv e d ir e c tio n .
I t co u ld be argued t h a t the p o s i t i v e e v a lu a t iv e d im en sion , '
the dim ensions o f poten cy or a c t i v i t y , o th er u n d efin ed d i - i
m en sions, or some com b ination o f th e s e v a r ia b le s s e r v e as
c a u s a t iv e f a c t o r s fo r the p r e c i p i t a t i o n o f moments o f
|
s t u t t e r i n g . I
I
L im ita tio n s to th e in f e r e n c e s one can draw from th e |
|
r e s u l t s o f t h i s stu d y are a ls o imposed by the procedures !
i
i
employed to m anipulate word meaning. A lthough a change in j
s c a l e r e sp o n se s was ob served as a r e s u l t o f c l a s s i c a l con- j
d i t i o n i n g p ro ced u res, i t can be argued th a t only th e motor !
r esp o n se was c o n d itio n e d and not the in t e r v e n in g v a r ia b le j
j
o f c o n n o ta tiv e word meaning. The high degree o f c o n siste n c y j
o f the s u b j e c t s ' e v a lu a t io n s found in the r e p l i c a t i o n
s t u d i e s by Osgood and h is a s s o c i a t e s (1957) would n ot sup
p o r t t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Thus, i f the i n t e r n a l r esp o n se to;
j
word meaning i s assumed to be c o n d itio n e d , the r e s i s t a n c e td
j
e x t i n c t i o n o f t h i s c o n d itio n e d r e sp o n s e , as rep o rted in th e j
| 50
j l i t e r a t u r e (In sk o and Oakes, 1 9 6 6 ) , i s d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to
; th e f i n d in g s o f t h i s stu d y . I f e x t i n c t i o n o f the c o n d i-
I
I
t io n e d s c a l e r e s p o n s e s was r a p id , th e n the tim e i n t e r v a l j
; j
which la p s e d betw een th e l a s t c o n d i t i o n i n g t r i a l and th e I
i
measurement o f moments o f s t u t t e r i n g could account f o r the j
|
n e g a t iv e r e s u l t s . However, r e s i s t a n c e to e x t i n c t i o n o f the j
CR s u g g e s t s th a t the change in s c a l e r e sp o n s e s i s a r e s u l t j
j
o f c o g n i t i v e change i n sym bolic s i g n i f i c a n c e . This i n t e r - j
p r e t a t i o n s u g g e s t s t h a t c o n n o t a tiv e word meaning may be I
!
com prised o f , or a s s o c i a t e d w ith , a d d i t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s such !
I
as a f f e c t a r o u s a l t h a t cannot be measured by r e s p o n s e s on j
j
s c a l e s . Thus, i t c o u ld be argued t h a t the s c a l e s do n o t j
measure the c r i t i c a l word meaning v a r ia b le t h a t s e r v e s as a !
i
c a u s a t i v e agen t fo r th e p r e c i p i t a t i o n o f moments o f s t u t - ;
(
t e r i n g . i
j
A CS-UCS i n t e r v a l of two seco n d s was employed in j
t h i s s tu d y . C l a s s i c a l c o n d it i o n i n g o f autonom ic r e sp o n s e s j
( B e e c r o f t , 1966) have dem onstrated t h a t s h o r t e r CS-UCS ;
i n t e r v a l s ( a llo w in g f o r the n e c e s s a r y r e a c t i o n tim e) i n - j
c r e a s e the magnitude o f the c o n d it io n e d r e s p o n s e . T h er e- j
f o r e , a s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e in moments o f s t u t t e r i n g might j
be o b ta in e d w ith a s t r o n g e r CR r e s u l t i n g from a s h o r t e r CS- ;
t
I
UCS i n t e r v a l . i
j I m p lic a t io n s o f
1 Supplem entary F in d in g s
The major i m p l i c a t i o n o f th e su pp lem en tary f i n d in g s j
i j
i i s th e i n d i v i d u a l i t y o f s c a l e r e s p o n s e s . S in c e the p e r - j
ice n ta g e o f words h a v in g the same s c a l e r e s p o n s e s among j
s u b j e c t s was e x tr e m e ly low , assu m p tion s c o n c er n in g the con- j
n o t a t i v e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f words must be dem on strated in \
■ I
f u t u r e s t u d i e s r e l a t i n g sem an tic d im en sio n s o f sp e e c h to !
s t u t t e r i n g . I t a l s o was o f i n t e r e s t to n o te th a t each sub
j e c t ' s n e g a t i v e e v a l u a t i o n s appeared t o c e n te r upon words
r e l a t e d to one or two c o n c e p t s . For exam p le, one s u b j e c t j
I
responded i n the n e g a t i v e d i r e c t i o n to words c o n n o tin g j
j
b o d ily harm such as " h u r t ,” "maime,T t " s u f f e r , " " p a in ," e t c . j
<
The r e l i a b i l i t y o f t h i s e m p ir ic a l o b s e r v a t io n , how ever, i s
a concern f o r fu tu r e r e s e a r c h .
The r e d u c tio n in moments o f s t u t t e r i n g ob serv ed on
the n e u t r a l s t u t t e r e d words f o l l o w i n g tre a tm en t f o r Condi
t i o n F, s u g g e s t s th e o c c u r r e n c e o f some type o f a d a p ta tio n
phenomenon. The most l o g i c a l e x p la n a t io n i s the co n v en - |
t i o n a l s u b j e c t a d a p ta t io n whereby s t u t t e r i n g i s reduced by
co n tin u ed r e a d in g s o f th e same p a s s a g e . However, th e neu-
i
t r a l s t u t t e r e d words were s e l e c t e d on th e b a s i s o f f a i l u r e I
|
to show th e e f f e c t o f a d a p ta tio n d u rin g the f i v e r e a d in g s , j
There i s no rea so n t o assume t h a t a d a p ta tio n would occur j
on a s i x t h r e a d in g . Thus, an e x p e r im e n te r e f f e c t or a !
I
!s a t i a t i o n e f f e c t i s p o s i t e d . That i s , l i s t e n i n g to th e
j s u b j e c t s ' s t u t t e r e d words sp ok en f l u e n t l y by th e e x p e r i -
Imenter p erh a p s produced an a d a p t a t io n phenomenon by o th e r
j-ttian c o n v e n t i o n a l m eans. However, th e n e g a t i v e s t u t t e r e d j
Iwords d id n o t show t h i s d ecrem en t i n f r e q u e n c y o f s t u t t e r - j
i
.in g . I t i s p o s s i b l e t o s p e c u l a t e t h a t words w ith l e s s i n - j
i
t e n s e m eaning adap t more r e a d i l y than words w ith g r e a t e r !
!
i n t e n s i t y o f m ea n in g . In d e e d , f u t u r e r e s e a r c h m ight w e l l |
\
i n v e s t i g a t e p h o n e t i c , p r o s o d ic and s e m a n tic f a c t o r s o f !
i
words t o e x p l a i n why o n ly c e r t a i n words f o r th e p a r t i c u l a r j
!
s u b j e c t show th e c o n s i s t e n c y ( l o c i o f s t u t t e r i n g moments
j
rem ain c o n s t a n t d u r in g r e p e a t e d r e a d in g ) and a d a p t a t io n j
|
i
e f f e c t s .
£
I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r
F u tu r e R e se a r c h
I
F u tu r e r e s e a r c h i n th e area o f c o n n o t a t i v e m eaning
i
i
and s t u t t e r i n g must r e c o g n i z e th e l i m i t a t i o n s im posed by j
]
th e u t i l i z a t i o n o f a h y p o t h e s i z e d i n t e r n a l e v e n t to e x p l a i n j
a s u b s e q u e n t r e s p o n s e . A lth o u g h c o n c l u s i v e t e s t s seem v e r y |
i
u n l i k e l y due t o th e n a tu r e o f th e l i m i t a t i o n s p r e v i o u s l y j
i
c i t e d , s e v e r a l a r e a s o f i n v e s t i g a t i o n m igh t prove f r u i t f u l . !
J
P o s t - c o n d i t i o n i n g m easures o f th e s c a l e r e s p o n s e s |
on n e u t r a l f l u e n t words i n d i c a t e d a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e
from th e p r e - c o n d i t i o n i n g m easu res i n C o n d it io n E o f t h i s
s t u d y . H owever, th e p o s t - c o n d i t i o n i n g r e s p o n s e s (CR) were
:l e s s i n i n t e n s i t y th an th e r e s p o n s e s t o th e n e g a t i v e s t u t -
i
| t e r e d words (UCR), as would be e x p e c t e d i n h i g h e r - o r d e r
j c o n d i t i o n i n g . T h e r e f o r e , a d i f f e r e n t UCS su ch as e l e c t r o -
jshock m igh t r e s u l t i n a s t r o n g e r CR and, s u b s e q u e n t l y , a
. s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e i n moments o f s t u t t e r i n g m ight be ob -
t
t a i n e d . j
Only th e e v a l u a t i v e d im e n sio n o f c o n n o t a t i v e word
.meaning i n th e n e g a t i v e d i r e c t i o n was e x p lo r e d in t h i s ;
|
s t u d y . A lth o u g h t h i s d im e n sio n was t h e s t r o n g e s t and purest]
f a c t o r , o t h e r d im e n s io n s , or th e p o s i t i v e d i r e c t i o n o f th e
I
i
ie v a lu a -tiv e d im e n s io n , m igh t prove t o be more c r i t i c a l f a c - ,
t o r s f o r th e p r e c i p i t a t i o n o f moments o f s t u t t e r i n g . !
For th e p r e - t r e a t m e n t and p o s t - t r e a t m e n t m easures
o f s c a l e r e s p o n s e and s t u t t e r i n g f r e q u e n c y , th e words were
I
!
p la c e d i n a n o n gram m atical and red u ced s e m a n tic c o n t e x t . i
1
i
In a d d i t i o n , i s o l a t e d words were em ployed f o r th e tr e a tm e n t j
c o n d i t i o n s . The i n c l u s i o n o f g r a m m a tica l c o n t e x t would j
appear t o be a f r u i t f u l l e a d f o r f u t u r e i n v e s t i g a t i o n . j
t
C o n te x t would en g en d er more extrem e s c a l e r a t i n g s (W ilc o x , i
F
1 9 6 6 ) . I s o l a t e d words o f t e n r e l y on c o n t e x t a n d /o r s i t u - j
a t i o n f o r t h e i r m ean in g. T hat i s , a s i n g l e word m igh t be j
p o s i t i v e l y or n e g a t i v e l y e v a lu a t e d d e p e n d in g upon th e u s e . j
i
S
T h e r e f o r e , c o n t e x t would r e s t r i c t th e v a r i a b i l i t y o f th e
s u b j e c t s ' e v a l u a t i o n s . The r e s u l t s o f t h i s stu d y w h ich !
i n d i c a t e d t h a t s t u t t e r e d words (UCSs) d id n o t change v a - i
l e n c e s u g g e s t s t i l l a n o th er a rea o f c o n t e x t u a l f o c u s .
t
T h e o r e t i c a l l y , one c o u ld argue t h a t s t u t t e r i n g , as an |
] j
a v o id a n c e r e s p o n s e or a p r o d u c t o f a p p r o a c h -a v o id a n c e i
J
j c o n f l i c t , would occur on words p r e c e d in g s p e c i f i c words w ith
j
in t e n s e c o n n o t a tiv e m eaning. In a d d it io n , th e sp ea k in g o f a
iword w ith i n t e n s e meaning might p r e c i p i t a t e moments o f s t u t
t e r i n g on words f o l l o w i n g the s p e c i f i c words. Prom t h e s e j
:v ie w p o in ts, c o n n o t a tiv e word meaning would be a c a u s a l f a c - j
to r fo r the p r e c i p i t a t i o n o f moments o f s t u t t e r i n g a lth o u g h
th e s t u t t e r i n g would not n e c e s s a r i l y occur on the word o f
i n t e n s e meaning.
The p r e s e n t i n v e s t i g a t i o n u t i l i z e d s c a l e s f o r the
measurement o f word m eaning. Other f a c t o r s o f word meaning,:
such as a f f e c t a r o u s a l, m ight be more c r i t i c a l v a r i a b l e s for;
i
the p r e c i p i t a t i o n o f moments o f s t u t t e r i n g . T h e r e fo r e ,
J
p h y s i o l o g i c a l r e s p o n s e s t o words as a s s o c i a t e d w ith s t u t t e r - j
in g b e h a v io r would appear to be f r u i t f u l le a d s fo r f u t u r e j
i n v e s t i g a t i o n . ;
REFERENCES
Adams, M. and D i e t z e , D* , A com parison o f th e r e a c t i o n
tim es o f s t u t t e r e r s and n o n s t u t t e r e r s to item s on
word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t . J . Speech Hear. R e s ., 8,
1 9 5 -2 0 2 ( 1 9 6 5 ). “
B a r d r ic k , R . , E m otion al c o n te n t as a f a c t o r in s t u t t e r i n g
b e h a v io r . Ph.D. D i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e r s it y o f
C a l i f o r n i a at Los A n g ele s ( 1 9 5 6 ) .
B e e c r o f t , R. S . , C l a s s i c a l C o n d it io n in g . G o le ta , C a l i f . :
Psychnom ic P r e s s ("1966) .
B l o o d s t e i n , O . , A r a t i n g s c a l e stu d y o f c o n d it io n s under
which s t u t t e r i n g i s reduced or a b s e n t. J . Speech
Hear. P i s . , 15, 29-36 ( 1 9 5 0 ) .
B oyer, E. An e x p e r im e n ta l stu d y o f sp ee ch f lu e n c y under
s t r e s s as a f u n c t i o n o f the e m o t i o n a li t y o f sp eech
c o n t e n t . Ph.D. D i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e r s i t y o f
Sou thern C a l i f o r n i a ( 1 9 5 8 ) .
Brown, S . , The i n f l u e n c e o f gram m atical f u n c t io n s on the
in c id e n c e of s t u t t e r i n g . J . Speech D i s . , 2, 1 7-19
( 1 9 3 7 ) .
C u rle e, R . , An e x p e r im e n ta l stu d y o f the e f f e c t o f p u n is h
ment o f the e x p e c ta n c y t o s t u t t e r on the fre q u en cy
o f su b seq u en t e x p e c t a n c ie s and s t u t t e r i n g . Ph.D.
D i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e r s i t y o f S ou thern C a l i f o r n ia
( 1 9 6 7 ).
E is e n s o n , J . and H orow itz, E . , The i n f l u e n c e o f p r o p o s i
t i o n a l i t y on s t u t t e r i n g . J . Speech Hear. D i s . , 10
193-197 ( 1 9 4 5 ).
F e a th e r , B . , Sem antic g e n e r a l i z a t i o n o f c l a s s i c a l l y c o n d i
tio n e d r e s p o n s e s : a r e v ie w . P s y c h o lo g ic a l
B u l l e t i n , 63, 4 25-44 1 (1 9 6 5 ).
56
G lauber, I . P . , The p s y c h o a n a ly s is o f s t u t t e r i n g . In
J . E ise n s o n ( E d .) , S t u t t e r i n g : A Symposium.
New York: Harper and Row (1 9 5 8 ).
G u ilfo r d , J . P . , Fundamental S t a t i s t i c s in P sy c h o lo g y and
Education" Third e d i t i o n . New YorlTi McGraw-Hill j
( 1 9 5 6 ). |
Hahn, E ., A stu d y o f the r e l a t i o n s h i p between s t u t t e r i n g I
o ccu rr en ce s and gram m atical f a c t o r s in o r a l reading.!
J . Speech Hear. D i s . , 7, 329-335 ( 1 9 4 2 ). j
i
:Hare, R. C o g n itiv e f a c t o r s in t r a n s f e r o f meaning. j
P s y c h o lo g ic a l R e p o r ts , 1 5 , 199-206 ( 1 9 6 4 ). |
i
Hays, W., S t a t i s t i c s fo r P s y c h o l o g i s t s . New York: H o lt, |
R in eh a rt and Wins ton (1 9 6 3 ). \
i
!
H ejna, R . , A stu d y o f the l o c i o f s t u t t e r i n g in spontaneous ’
sp e e c h . D i s s e r t . A b s t r a c t s , 2 5 , 1674-1675 (1 9 5 5 ). j
H u ll, C. L . , P r i n c i p l e s o f B e h a v io r . New York: A p pleton -
Century (1 9 4 3 ).
In sk o, C. and Oakes, W., Awareness and the c o n d it io n in g of
a t t i t u d e s . J . P e r s o n a li t y & S o c ia l P s y c h ., 4, i
4 87-496 ( 1966T.
John son , W . and A insw orth, S . , S tu d ie s in th e p sych olo gy of j
s t u t t e r i n g : X. Constancy o f l o c i o f e x p ecta n cy o f j
s t u t t e r i n g . Speech D i s . , 3^ 101-104 (1 9 3 8 ). j
s
Johnson, W. and I n n e s s , M., S tu d ie s in the p sy ch o lo g y of
s t u t t e r i n g : X I I I . A s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s is o f the j
a d a p ta tio n and c o n s is t e n c y e f f e c t s in r e l a t i o n to j
s t u t t e r i n g . J^ Speech D i s . , 4, 7 9-86 (1 9 3 9 ). j
Johnson, W . and K nott, J . , S tu d ie s i n the p sych olo gy o f !
s t u t t e r i n g : I . The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f moments o f ’
s t u t t e r i n g in s u c c e s s i v e r ea d in g s o f the same j
m a t e r ia l. Speech D i s . , 2, 17-19 (1 9 3 7 ). ;
Koen, F ., P o l a r i z a t i o n , m, and e m o t io n a lit y i n words. j
J . Verb. Learn, and Verb. B e h a v ,, 1, 183-187 i
TT9627:----------------------------------------------------- !
M i l l e r , A. W., C o n d itio n in g c o n n o ta tiv e meaning. J . Gen. i
P s y c h ., 75, 319-328 (1 9 6 6 a ). !
57
R e l a t i o n s h i p s o f aw areness to v e r b a l l e a r n in g
e f f i c i e n c y and meaning change. P sy c h . R e p o r ts, 19,
! 8 75-88 3 (1 9 6 6 b ).
■Moore, W., S od erb erg, G ., and P o w e ll, D. , R e l a t i o n s o f
s t u t t e r i n g in sp on tan eou s sp ee ch and v e r b a l o u tp u t.
Speech Hear. D i s . , 17, 3 71-37 6 (1 9 5 2 ) . j
j !
■Moore, W., R e l a t i o n s o f s t u t t e r i n g in sp on tan eou s sp e e c h t o j
sp ee ch c o n t e n t and t o a d a p ta t io n . J . Speech Hear. '
D i s . , 19, 2 08-21 6 (1 9 5 4 ) . j
Osgood, C . , S u c i, G ., and Tannenbaum, P . , The Measurement
o f Meaning. Urbana: U n iv e r s i t y o f I l l i n o i s P r e ss
T1937TT |
Osgood-, C. E . , Method and Theory in E x p er im e n ta l P sy c h o lo g y .
New York: Oxford U n i v . P r e s s ( 1 9 5 3 ),
;P e in s , M ., C o n s is t e n c y e f f e c t in s t u t t e r i n g e x p e c ta n c y .
J . Speech Hear. D i s . , 4, 3 97-398 ( 1 9 6 1 ) .
P e t e r s , R. and Simonson, W,, G e n e r a liz a t io n o f s t u t t e r i n g j
b e h a v io r through a s s o c i a t i v e l e a r n i n g . J . Speech !
Hear. R e s . , 3, 9 -1 4 ( 1 9 6 0 ) .
P h e la n , J . , Hekmat, H ., and Tang, T . , T r a n sfe r o f v e r b a l
c o n d i t i o n i n g to n o n -v e r b a l b e h a v io r . P sy ch .
R e p o r ts , 20, 979-986 ( 1 9 6 7 ).
Q u a rrin g to n , B ., S t u t t e r i n g as a f u n c t i o n o f the in fo rm a
t i o n v a lu e and s e n t e n c e p o s i t i o n o f w ords. J .
Abnormal P s y c h . , 7 0 , 22 1 -2 2 4 ( 1 9 6 5 ) .
S c h l e s i n g e r , I . , F o r te , M., F r ie d , B . , and Melkman, R . ,
S t u t t e r i n g , in fo r m a tio n lo a d , and r esp o n se s t r e n g t h .
J . Speech Hear. D i s . , 30, 3 2 -3 6 ( 1 9 6 5 ).
i
Sheehan, J . , C o n f l i c t th e o ry o f s t u t t e r i n g . In J . E is e n s o n !
( E d .) , S t u t t e r i n g : A Symposium. New York: Harper
and Row ( 1 9 5 8 ) .
S i e g e l , S . , N onparam etrie S t a t i s t i c s fo r the B e h a v io r a l
S c i e n c e s . New Yorkl M cG raw -H ill, IncT ( 1 9 5 6 ).
S od erb erg , G ., L i n g u i s t i c f a c t o r s in s t u t t e r i n g . J . Speech
Hear. R e s . , 10, 801-810 ( 1 9 6 7 ).
i
3
I
S t a a t s , A ., C o n d it io n e d s t i m u l i , c o n d i t i o n e d r e i n f o r c e r s ,
and word m ean in g . In A. S t a a t s ( E d . ) , Human
L e a r n in g . San F r a n c i s c o : H o lt , R in e h a r t and
W in sto n , I n c . ( 1 9 6 4 ) .
}
j
S t a a t s , A. and S t a a t s , C . , M eaning e s t a b l i s h e d by c l a s s i c a l I
c o n d i t i o n i n g . J . Exp. P s y c h . , 5 4 , 7 4 -8 0 ( 1 9 5 7 ) . j
1 1 " " ' ' {
___________. E f f e c t o f number o f t r i a l s on th e la n g u a g e c o n
d i t i o n i n g o f m ean in g . The Amer. P s y c h o l o g i s t ,
1 3 , 415 ( 1 9 5 8 ) .
S t a a t s , A .,- S t a a t s , C . , and B i g g s , D . , M eaning o f v e r b a l
s t i m u l i changed by c o n d i t i o n i n g . Amer. J , P s y c h . ,
7 1 , 4 2 9 -4 3 1 ( 1 9 5 8 ) .
S t a a t s , A ., S t a a t s , C . , and C raw ford, H . , F i r s t - o r d e r
c o n d i t i o n i n g o f m eaning and th e p a r a l l e l c o n d i -
~ t i o n i n g o f a GSR. J . Gen. P s y c h . , 67, 1 5 9 -1 6 7
( 1 9 6 2 ) .
S t a a t s , A ., S t a a t s , C. , F i n l e y , J . , and M inke, K ., Meaning
e s t a b l i s h e d by c l a s s i c a l c o n d i t i o n i n g c o n t r o l l i n g
a s s o c i a t e s t o th e UCS. J . Gen. P s y c h . , 69,
2 4 7 -2 5 2 ( 1 9 6 3 ) .
S t a a t s , A ., S t a a t s , C . , and H eard, W., Language c o n d i t i o n
in g o f m eaning t o m eaning u s in g s e m a n tic g e n e r a l i
z a t i o n p aradigm . J . Exp. P s y c h . , 57, 1 8 7 -1 9 2
( 1 9 5 9 ) .
___________. A t t i t u d e d e v e lo p m en t and r a t i o o f r e i n f o r c e m e n t .
S o c i o m e t r y , 2 3 , 3 3 8 -3 5 0 ( 1 9 6 0 ) .
S t a a t s , A ., S t a a t s , C . , H eard, W ., and N im s, L . , R e p l i c a
t i o n r e p o r t : m eaning e s t a b l i s h e d by c l a s s i c a l
c o n d i t i o n i n g . Exp. P s y c h . , 5 7 , 64 ( 1 9 5 9 ) .
T h o r n d ik e , E . , and L o r g e, I . , The T e a c h e r 's Word Book o f
3 0 ,0 0 0 W ords. New York: ^Teachers C o l l e g e ,
Colum bia U n i v e r s i t y ( 1 9 4 4 ) .
W ilc o x , R . , E f f e c t s o f c o n t e x t on s e m a n tic d i f f e r e n t i a l
r a t i n g s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1 8 , 8 7 3 -8 7 4
( 1 9 6 6 ) . :
W in g a te, M ., P e r s o n a l co m m u n icatio n ( 1 9 6 8 ) .
W ischner, G. J . , S t u t t e r i n g and le a r n in g : a p r e lim in a r y
t h e o r e t i c a l fo r m u la tio n . J . Speech Hear. D i s . ,
15, 324-33 5 (1 9 5 0 ) .
APPENDIX A
WORDS UTILIZED IN TRAINING
PROCEDURES
60
61
TRAINING WORDS
V isu a l S t im u li
d ea th
c o t
m o d e r n is t ic
lo v e
a lo n g s id e
A u ditory S t im u li
D is c r im in a t iv e C h oices
b r i e f - b r i e f c a s e
t r a i n i n g - t r a i n
d a n c e h a ll - dance
bed - bedroom
woman - man
b u i ld in g - b u ild
tomb - tom bstone
b e a u t i f u l - beauty
b r o th e r - b o th er
im agine - im a g in a tio n
b r i e f
t r a i n i n g
dance
bedroom
woman
b u ild
tomb
b eau ty
b ro th e r
im a g in a tio n
APPENDIX B
WORDS UTILIZED IN EXPERIMENTAL
PROCEDURES
EXPERIMENTAL W ORDS
P r e t t y and e v i d e n t l y r etu r n sorrow in
fu r th e r k i l l q u e s tio n h a te rape g r i e f tr o u b le
the t e r r i b l e probably suppose th e re su p p o sed ly
str o n g s t u t t e r .
What ig n o r a n t somebody a c c id e n t hurt
t h i s murder a n yth in g w ith in d is h o n e s t y maime
d e str o y d i s a s t e r account fe a r w e ll n o th in g n e ss
on darkness d i f f i c u l t y hatred s o n o f a b it c h
around bad.
U gly would t h o u g h t f u lly s ic k n e s s queer
joy hundred can. Whatever s t u p id homosexual
rea son s u f f e r seem p o s s i b l y happy s t a t i o n
v ic t im out cocksucker e v e r y th in g s t i n k i n g
t h e r e f o r e d e s t r u c t io n w ith c h e a t.
S i s s y a p p a re n tly a tta c k harm morbid i d i o t
very k in d n ess b a s ta r d p r o s t i t u t e c h a ir anyway.
C on tain p r ic k i n t e r e s t i n g u n t i l vom it. S i t u
a t io n c r u e l t y beauty s t e a l b lood y cowardly
whore one ravage h o s t i l i t y c o n v e r s a tio n .
M otherfucker d i f f e r e n c e f o r p a r t ic u la r
s t r i k e a s s h o le a cce p t b ed w etter war a l l r e q u ir e
some in sa n e e v e n t u a l ly appear cou ld dumb c e r
t a i n l y again at a c t u a l l y som ething te le p h o n e .
Stammer as venom m u t ila te h e l l m o lest
became here d a s ta r d ly b i t c h outerm ost accord in g
from s ta b b in g . F a ilu r e n e it h e r an s y p h i l i s
anybody pain a lth ou gh been circu m sta n ce w eakling
n e c e s s a r i l y . Had c a s t r a t i o n bum w o r th le s s p e a c e
f u l im potence. S i n f u l l u s t company hand f i l t h y
f o u r te e n ago d eath r i o t i n g envy van d alism pen
e v i l d i r t y .
APPENDIX. C
SAMPLE JUDGMENT SHEET
FOR SCALED RESPONSES
65
SAMPLE JUDGMENT SHEET j
i
lo v e
un pleas ant
good X ____
m o d e r n istic
-------
X p le a s a n t
bad
bad
p le a s ant
------------------
X
X
death
-------
good
u n p le a sa n t
good
p le a s a n t
------- " -------
c o t
X
X
bad
un pleas ant
un pleas ant
bad
X
X
a lo n g s id e
-------
p le a s a n t
good
p le a s a n t
bad
------- -------
X
X
-------
u n p le a sa n t
good
good ____ bad
u n p le a sa n t ____ p le a s a n t
APPENDIX D
INSTRUCTIONS TO SUBJECTS
FOR SCALED RESPONSES
66
67
INSTRUCTIONS TO SUBJECTS
The purpose o f t h i s stu d y i s t o measure th e mean- j
| in g s o f c e r t a i n t h in g s t o v a r io u s p e o p le by h a v in g them i
judge them a g a in s t a s e r i e s o f d e s c r i p t i v e s c a l e s . In j
; t a k in g t h i s t e s t , p le a s e make your judgm ents on the b a s i s j
: o f what t h e s e th in g s mean to y o u . In t h i s b o o k le t you w i l l s
- f in d a d i f f e r e n t c o n c ep t to be Judged and b en e a th i t a s e t j
o f s c a l e s . You are to r a te th e c o n c ep t on each o f t h e s e |
s c a l e s in o r d e r. ;
1 i
Here i s how you are t o use t h e s e s c a l e s : \
i
I f you f e e l t h a t the c o n c e p t a t th e to p o f the page i s v e r y ;
c l o s e l y r e l a t e d to one end o f th e s c a l e , you sh ou ld p la c e ;
your check-m ark as f o l l o w s : :
good X bad
or
good X bad
I f you f e e l t h a t the c o n c e p t i s q u it e c l o s e l y r e l a t e d to
one or th e o th e r end of th e s c a l e (but n o t e x tr e m e ly ) you
sh o u ld p la c e your check-m ark as f o l l o w s :
good X bad
or
good X bad
I f th e c o n c e p t seems o n ly s l i g h t l y r e l a t e d to one s i d e as
opposed to the o th e r s i d e (but n ot r e a l l y n e u t r a l ) , then
you sh o u ld check as f o l l o w s :
bad X good
bad
or
X good
The d i r e c t i o n toward which you check , o f c o u r se , depends i
upon w hich o f the two ends o f th e s c a l e seem most c h a r a c
t e r i s t i c o f the t h in g you*re ju d g in g . I f you c o n s id e r the
co n c ep t t o be n e u t r a l on th e s c a l e , b oth s i d e s o f the s c a l e
e q u a lly a s s o c i a t e d w ith the c o n c e p t, or i f the s c a l e i s
c o m p le te ly i r r e l e v a n t , u n r e la t e d to th e c o n c e p t, then you
sh o u ld p la c e your check-mark in th e m iddle sp a ce: j
jun pleasant ____________ X p le a s a n t
jIMPORTANT:
(1) P la c e your check-m arks in th e m iddle o f s p a c e s , not
on the bou n d aries:
X X
t h i s not t h i s
(2) Never put more than one check-mark on a s i n g l e sp a ce .
Sometimes you may f e e l as though y o u ’ve had the same
item b e fo r e on the t e s t . T his w i l l not be the c a s e , so do
not lo ok back and f o r t h through th e ite m s . Do n ot tr y to
remember how you clieeked s i m i la r item s e a r l i e r in the t e s t .
Make each item a se p a r a te and ind ep en dent judgm ent. Work
at f a i r l y h ig h speed through t h i s t e s t . "Do not worry or
p u zz le over i n d iv i d u a l ite m s . I t i s your f i r s t im p r e s s io n s ,
the immediate " f e e l i n g s " about the ite m s, th a t we want. On
the oth er hand, p l e a s e do not be c a r e l e s s , becau se we want
your tru e im p r e s s io n s .
APPENDIX E
INSTRUCTIONS TO JUDGES
I
INSTRUCTIONS TO JUDGES
You w i l l hear a tap e r e c o r d in g o f n in e d i f f e r e n t
[ in d iv id u a ls who s t u t t e r . Each i n d i v i d u a l w i l l say a s e r i e s
o f tw enty words which you w i l l f i n d on th e s h e e t s g iv e n
you. You are t o p la c e a check b e s id e th e a p p r o p r ia te word
f o r each moment o f s t u t t e r i n g you h e a r . P r io r to h e a r in g
the tw enty words which you w i l l check, each i n d i v i d u a l w i l l
say a s e r i e s o f words in order to f a m i l i a r i z e you w ith h is
v o i c e and h i s p a t t e r n o f s p e a k in g . You w i l l then be t o ld
to b e g in marking the tw enty-w ord s e r i e s . P le a s e inform
the ex p e rim en ter i f you w ish any s e r i e s r e p la y e d .
You are to use your own p e r s o n a l c r i t e r i a to d e f in e
moments o f s t u t t e r i n g w ith th e f o l l o w i n g e x c e p t io n : a l l
a ttem p ts made by the i n d i v i d u a l t o say a g iv e n s y l l a b l e
are to be counted as t,one moment o f s t u t t e r i n g .
Are th e r e any q u e s t io n s b e fo r e we b e g in ?
APPENDIX P
TABLES 2, 3, 4, 5 AND 6
RESULTS OF CHANGE IN CONNOTATIVE
W ORD MEANING RESPONSE
72
TABLE 2
1
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PRE-CONDITIONING AND j
POST-CONDITIONING SCALE RESPONSES j
FOR NEUTRAL FLUENT W ORDS
OF CONDITION E
S u b je c ts P r e - T e s t P o s t - T e s t d
Rank
o f
d
Rank o f d
w ith l e a s t
f r e q u e n t s i g n
1 20 32 12 8
2 20 23 3 3 .5
3 20 29
Q
7
4 20 23 3 3 .5
5 20 2 5 .5 5 .5 5
6 20 26 6 6
7 20 2 2 .5 2 .5 2
8 20 22 2 1
9 20 20 0
T = 0
p < .0 1 , N = 8
t
I
I
I
TABLE 3
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PRE-CONDITIONING AND
POST-CONDITIONING SCALE RESPONSES
FOR NEUTRAL FLUENT WORDS
OF CONDITION F
i
S u b je c t s P r e -T e s t P o s t-T e s t d
Rank
o f
d
-----------------------------!
Rank o f d 1
w ith l e a s t i
fr e q u e n t sign]
j
1 20 25 5 5
!
2 20 17 -3 -4
1
3 20 18 -2 - 2 . 5
1
1
4 20 20 0
1
1
5 20 20 0
1
1
6 20 20 0
f
7 20 19 - I -1
8 20 18 -2 - 2 . 5
9 20 20 0
I
i
j
74
TABLE 4
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PRE-CONDITIONING AND
POST-CONDITIONING SCALE RESPONSES
FOR NEUTRAL FLUENT WORDS
OF CONDITION T
S u b je c ts P r e -T e s t P o s t - T e s t
Rank
d o f
d
Rank o f d
w ith l e a s t
f r e q u e n t s i g n
1 20 20 0
2 20 17 -3 -3
3 20 21 1 1
4 20 20 0
5 20 20 0
6 20 20 0
i 20 15. 5 - 4 . 5 -4
8 20 20 0
9 20 1 7 .5 - 2 . 5 -2
75
TABLE 5
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PRE-CONDITIONING AND
POST-CONDITIONING SCALE RESPONSES
FOR NEGATIVE STUTTERED WORDS
OF CONDITION E
S u b je c ts P r e -T e s t P o s t - T e s t d
Rank
o f
d
Rank o f d
w ith l e a s t
f r e q u e n t s ig n
1
2
1 2 1 .5
7 0 .0
1 3 0 .5
7 0 .0
9 .0
0 .0
8 8
3 4 7 .0 4 1 .5 - 5 . 5 - 5 . 5
4 1 0 5 .0 1 0 7 .0 2 .0 4 4
5 4 9 .0 4 7 .5 - 1 . 5 -3
6 4 1 .5 3 6 .0 - 5 . 5 - 5 . 5
7 3 3 .0 3 2 .0 - 1 . 0 -2
8 2 4 .0 2 3 .0 - 0 . 5 -1
9 1 5 1 .5 1 4 4 .0 - 7 . 5 -7
T = 12*
*Not s i g n i f i c a n t (p > .0 5 )
76
TABLE 6
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PRE-CONDITIONING AND j
POST-CONDITIONING SCALE RESPONSES j
I
FOR NEUTRAL STUTTERED WORDS j
!
OF CONDITION F j
J
S u b j e c t s P r e - T e s t P o s t - T e s t d
Rank
o f
d
Rank o f d
w it h l e a s t
f r e q u e n t s i g n
1 32 32 0
2 28 28 0
3 16 18 2 3 .5
4 36 35 -1 -1
5 16 1 4 . 5 - 1 . 5 - 2
6 32 26 -6 -5
7 16 14 - 2 - 3 . 5
8 20 20 0
9 : 88 88 0
I
i
I
i
i
i

Asset Metadata

Creator Spahr, Frederick Thomas (author)

Core Title Frequency Of Stuttering As A Function Of Connotative Word Meaning

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:digitallibrary.usc.edu:usctheses,OAI-PMH Harvest

Format dissertations (aat)

Language English

Advisor Perkins, William H. (committee chair), Haney, Russell (committee member), Slucki, Henry (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-653057

Unique identifier UC11361899

Identifier 6905070.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-653057 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 6905070.pdf

Dmrecord 653057

Document Type Dissertation

Format dissertations (aat)

Rights Spahr, Frederick Thomas

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