Abstract: Phonological and semantic recall was investigated in children who do (CWS) and do not stutter during a list recall paradigm. Participants listened to words that were phonologically, semantically and both phonologically and semantically related. Preliminary results indicate deficits in working memory in CWS when processing phonological information.
Description:
Introduction: Stuttering is a complex, multifactorial disorder that affects approximately 1% of the population (Conture, 2001). Working memory is a limited-capacity system, which temporarily stores information for immediate use and manipulation of some kind (Baddeley, 2012) and is one of the factors that has been suggested to contribute to the onset and development of stuttering, along with genetic, linguistic, cognitive, emotional and motor factors (e.g., Bajaj, 2007). Working memory plays a crucial role in speech planning and execution. Before producing a word, the speaker needs to construct the word’s phonetic plan, which will then be executed (e.g., Levelt, 1989). This process requires retrieval of phonemes from short and long-term memory and their temporary storage and verbal manipulation before they become available for motor execution (e.g., Levelt, 1989). Any delays in the construction of the phonetic plan (i.e., delayed planning stage) or discoordination between speech planning and execution (e.g., execution of an incomplete plan), may result in disfluent speech, as addressed in the EXPLAN model (Howell, 2004). The present study focused on the working memory ability of children who stutter, particularly on their phonological and semantic false memories, using the Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm (Roetiger & McDermott, 1995). The DRM paradigm involves the use of lists of words, which are related to one word that is not present on the list (i.e., lure word). The words in the lists can be associated semantically, phonologically or both semantically and phonologically (i.e., hybrid list). The results of the proposed study will shed light on the organization of phonological and semantic representations of children who stutter as well as their recall ability of phonological and semantic information.
Method: Participants in the study include 10 school-age children who stutter and 10 typically fluent children, ages 5-10 years. All participants were native English speakers and matched in age and gender with children who do not stutter. Formal speech and language testing as well as a hearing screening were administered prior to the experiment; the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test- Edition IV (PPVT-Dunn & Dunn, 2007) and the Expressive Vocabulary Test- Edition II (EVT-Williams, 2007) were used in order to assess receptive and expressive vocabulary ability and the Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing-2nd edition (CTOPP-Wagner et al., 1999) for the assessment of phonological skills and phonological working memory. The primary criteria to determine stuttering status included: a) parental concern regarding the child’s fluency, b) formal diagnosis by a licensed speech-language pathologist and c) a score of 11 or higher on the Stuttering Severity Instrument (SSI-4; Riley, 2009) based on a 300-word conversational sample. The experimental task and stimuli were based on a previous study by Byrd, Sheng, Bernstein Ratner, and Gkalitsiou (2015) that used the DRM paradigm (Roetiger & McDermott, 1995). Participants were asked to listen to and immediately recall as many words as possible from a list of 12 words that are related to an unpresented, critical lure word, either semantically, phonologically, or both semantically and phonologically (i.e. hybrid list). For example, for the critical lure word ‘wet’ the semantic list included words such as damp, slippery, splash, etc., the phonological list comprised of words such as vet, watt, west, etc., and the hybrid list included a combination of both types of words, such as damp, vet, slippery, watt, etc. Two practice lists were presented at the beginning of the task. Each participant was presented with a total of 12 lists, 4 on each condition (i.e. semantic, phonological, hybrid). The following three parameters of recall performance were collected: a) number of accurately recalled words, b) order of recall (words from the beginning of the list- i.e., primacy effect- vs. words from the end of the list – i.e., recency effect-), and c) the number of critical lure word productions (i.e., false memories).
Results: Data have been collected and participant responses have been transcribed. Coding of the responses regarding false memories and order of recall is currently ongoing and will be completed by the end of the summer. The number of accurate recalled words, the order of word recall and production of critical lures in each list type will be compared between children who stutter and children who do not. Preliminary data based on a few participants show that children who stutter recalled fewer words and made more errors compared to children who do not stutter in the phonological and the hybrid lists but no differences were found between the two groups in the semantic lists. Results will be discussed with respect to the role of working memory, particularly subvocal rehearsal and phonological loop, in stuttered speech.
Presentation Format & Methods: Interactive poster presentation with questions and answers
Supporting Research: Reference 1: Roediger, H. L., & McDermott, K. B. (1995). Creating false memories: Remembering words not presented in lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 803–814.
Supporting Research: Reference 2: Byrd, C.T., Sheng, L., Bernstein Ratner, N., & Gkalitsiou, Z. (2015) Veridical and false recall in adults who stutter. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 58, 28-42.
Supporting Research: Reference 3: Baddeley, A. (2003). Working memory and language: An overview. Journal of Communication Disorders, 36, 189-208.
Supporting Research: Reference 4: Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Supporting Research: Reference 5:
Learning Objectives:
Describe the processes involved in list recall paradigm
Describe the role of working memory in stuttering
Discuss how children who stutter organize and access their mental lexicon