Social Judgments of Digitally Manipulated Stuttered Speech: An Evaluation of Self-Disclosure on Cognition

Explicit and implicit cognitive processes of the public towards people who stutter

PURPOSE

The Public Opinion Survey of Human Attributes - Stuttering (POSHA-S, St. Louis, 2013) was developed as a standard measure of public attitudes about people who stutter. As with any survey-based methods, threats to validity may occur because of social desirability bias. Using computer mouse-tracking, we were interested in observing changes in cognition that are manifested in intentionality through action by evaluating underlying cognitive processes that drive social judgments of people who stutter.

METHODS

Twenty-two women, 1 non-binary person, and 47 men reported using a computer mouse to complete an online, remote, and modified version of the POSHA-S. Responses were categorized as correct/helpful or incorrect/unhelpful relative to each component of the POSHA-S and were used as measures of explicit cognitive processes. Computer-mouse trajectory metrics, including area under the curve (AUC) and reaction time (RT), were used to measure implicit cognitive processes.

RESULTS

Although participants' explicit responses were significantly more likely to be correct/helpful than incorrect/unhelpful, with endorsement of correct/helpful prompts 77 % of the time, participants also endorsed incorrect/unhelpful prompts more than half (i.e., 52 %) of the time. Familiarity with people who stutter was associated with disagreeing with incorrect/unhelpful prompts. As indicated by greater AUC, participants exhibited significantly more implicit cognitive processes indicating competition when responding "disagree" compared to "agree", regardless of whether the prompts were correct/helpful or incorrect/unhelpful. Similarly, participants took significantly longer to respond to prompts with "disagree" rather than "agree".

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study offer evidence of participants reporting cognitive processes that are overall more correct/helpful than incorrect/unhelpful, in their explicit responses to the dichotomous response tasks of the POSHA-S. However, these findings are tempered by evidence of a tendency to agree with statements in the measure and suggest the need for further research to increase understanding of how to measure and improve explicit and implicit cognitive processes related to people who stutter.

Self-perceived outcomes of informative and apologetic self-disclosure: A mixed methods study

PURPOSE

Self-disclosure statements that are informative, rather than apologetic, have been demonstrated to improve listener perceptions of adults who stutter (Byrd et al., 2017). The purpose of the present study is to investigate the benefits of self-disclosure from the perspective of the speaker and to determine whether self-disclosure statement type is associated with self-perceived outcomes of use.

METHOD

A total of 156 adults who stutter completed a survey adapted from a previous study investigating affective, behavioral, and cognitive outcomes of voluntary stuttering. Survey responses were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics to determine if there was a significant relationship between self-disclosure statement type and self-reported outcomes. Additionally, responses to two open-ended questions relating to timing of self-disclosure and self-disclosure experiences in general were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Self-disclosure was perceived as beneficial in at least one context by 96.8 % of respondents. Respondents who used an informative self-disclosure statement were more likely to agree that self-disclosure increased confidence and were less likely to report attempting to conceal or avoid stuttering than respondents who used an apologetic self-disclosure statement. Themes relating to additional aspects of self-disclosure experiences included personalized use, social connection, acceptance of stuttering, challenging cognitive distortions, communication is easier, self-empowerment, humor, voluntary stuttering, and vulnerability to prejudice.

CONCLUSION

Similar to studies investigating the influence of self-disclosure on listener perceptions, informative self-disclosure is associated with greater self-perceived benefits than apologetic self-disclosure for adults who stutter.

Impact of self-disclosure and communication competence on perceived listener distraction

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the distraction reported by unfamiliar adults when listening to a speaker who stutters, and whether listener distraction is influenced by two factors: self-disclosure and communication competence.

METHOD

Two hundred seventy-five adults watched a video vignette and were asked to rate their level of distraction when observing an adult Latinx male producing stuttered speech. Each participant watched one of six randomized videos of the same speaker sharing the same content systematically manipulated by (a) presence or absence of 15% stuttering, (b) presence or absence of self-disclosure, and (c) high or low communication competence.

RESULTS

Listener distraction was higher when rating speakers with low communication competence, regardless of whether stuttering or self-disclosure were heard. Videos wherein the speaker was fluent were rated as significantly less distracting, but only in the context of high communication competence. For videos wherein the speaker stuttered, listeners reported significantly less distraction when the speaker demonstrated high communication competence and self-disclosed.

FINDINGS

These findings suggest that for persons who stutter, high communication competence and disclosing that they stutter will yield maximum reduction in listener distraction.

Gender stereotypes drive perceptual differences of vocal confidence

One's ability to express confidence is critical to achieve one's goals in a social context-such as commanding respect from others, establishing higher social status, and persuading others. How individuals perceive confidence may be shaped by the socio-indexical cues produced by the speaker. In the current production/perception study, we asked four speakers (two cisgender women/men) to answer trivia questions under three speaking contexts: natural, overconfident, and underconfident (i.e., lack of confidence). An evaluation of the speakers' acoustics indicated that the speakers significantly varied their acoustic cues as a function of speaking context and that the women and men had significantly different acoustic cues. The speakers' answers to the trivia questions in the three contexts (natural, overconfident, underconfident) were then presented to listeners (N = 26) in a social judgment task using a computer mouse-tracking paradigm. Listeners were sensitive to the speakers' acoustic modulations of confidence and differentially interpreted these cues based on the perceived gender of the speaker, thereby impacting listeners' cognition and social decision making. We consider, then, how listeners' social judgments about confidence were impacted by gender stereotypes about women and men from social, heuristic-based processes.

Stuttering and the social model

Stuttering has traditionally been thought of as a defect located within an individual. As such, stuttering is caused by pathology, leading to impaired communication and reduced quality of life. Research from this medical tradition has looked to understand the etiology of stuttering to develop curative therapeutic approaches. From this frame, professionals and academics are experts and holders of knowledge; people who stutter the recipients of this expertise. The social model emerged from within the disability rights movement and offers a counter narrative. It sees the way society is structured as disabling rather than physical impairment itself. Disability is experienced when a person is unable to participate fully in society through a mismatch between their body and the environment around them; thus, disability becomes a dynamic process, not an inherent characteristic. The social model highlights society's norms and values, and, in the case of stuttering, demonstrates how society is designed for, and expects, fluent speakers. From this frame, people who stutter are the experts of their experience and holders of knowledge; professionals and academics are their allies, collaborators, and advocates for social change. This theoretical framework poses challenging questions of the foundational theories upon which stuttering therapy is historically rooted. They call into question the hierarchical structures, power dynamics and even purpose of stuttering therapy and research. In this discussion paper, we will explore the social model of disability and its implications for stuttering therapy and research. We discuss the benefits of a social model approach as well as its limitations.

A Point of View About Fluency

PURPOSE

This article presents several potential concerns with the common usage of the term fluency in the study of stuttering and people who stutter (or, as many speakers now prefer, stutterers). Our goal is to bridge gaps between clinicians, researchers, and stutterers to foster a greater sense of collaboration and understanding regarding the words that are used and meanings that are intended.

METHOD

We begin by reviewing the history of the term fluency. We then explore its usage and current connotations to examine whether the term meaningfully describes constructs that are relevant to the study of the stuttering condition.

RESULTS

By highlighting current research and perspectives of stutterers, we conclude that the term fluency (a) is not fully inclusive, (b) encourages the use of misleading measurement procedures, (c) constrains the subjective experience of stuttering within a false binary categorization, and (d) perpetuates a cycle of stigma that is detrimental to stutterers and to the stuttering community as a whole.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend that researchers and clinicians cease referring to stuttering as a fluency disorder and simply refer to it as stuttering. Furthermore, we recommend that researchers and clinicians distinguish between moments of stuttering (i.e., what stutterers experience when they lose control of their speech or feel stuck) and the overall lived experience of the stuttering condition.

Social Judgments of Digitally Manipulated Stuttered Speech: Cognitive Heuristics Drive Implicit and Explicit Bias

Purpose People who stutter are susceptible to discrimination, stemming from negative stereotypes and social misattributions. There has been a recent push to evaluate the underlying explicit and implicit cognitive mechanisms associated with social judgments, moving away from only evaluating explicit social bias about people who stutter. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate how listeners change their implicit and explicit social (mis)attributions after hearing a people who stutter produce disfluent speech. Method The current project was an adaptation of the Byrd et al. (2017) study to evaluate listener implicit/explicit social judgments of stuttered speech across five categories (i.e., confidence, friendliness, intelligence, distractibility, and extroversion) before and after a stuttering self-disclosure. This was done by implementing a modified version of the Ferguson et al. (2019) computer mouse-tracking paradigm. Results Consistent with previous findings, participants made more explicit positive social judgments of confidence, friendliness, extroversion, and intelligence after a stuttering self-disclosure, but the distractedness category was resistant to change. Also consistent with previous findings, participants experienced a higher degree of cognitive competition (i.e., higher area under the curve) shortly after self-disclosure, which lessened over time. Conclusions Explicit and implicit biases exist, but self-disclosure significantly impacts the cognitive system of listeners. Specifically, self-disclosure may reduce explicit bias through experience and explicit belief updating, but when cognitive heuristics are strong, implicit bias may be slower to change.