1. Research Article Danica Wyson

2. A Study in Psycholinguistics and Communication Disorders R. W. Rieber Journal: Linguistics Volume: 160 Date: 09/1975 John Jay College, CUNY, New York

3. Stuttering and Cluttering: What are they? Stuttering  talk with continued involuntary repetition of sounds, especially initial consonants. (Web)  Example Example Cluttering  Term for speech that becomes broken down, cluttered, or unintelligible due to a variety of reasons. Cluttered speech is often described as hurried, nervous, broken down, stuttering, stammering, and cluttering. (Web)  Example Example

4.  Seeman and Novak  Findings: Clutterers’ rate of speech > normal rate of speech (syllables/minute)  Luchsinger and Landolt  Abnormal EEG’s found in…  69% of total population  7% of stutterers  90 % of clutterers  Streifler and Gumpertz  Similar study, but no significant difference  Moravek and Langova  Similar study, but results showed that stutterers rate of abnormality > stutter-clutterers > clutterers Other Studies

5.  Results are inconclusive  Stutterers vs. Clutterers Moral of the story

6. Experiment

7.  Subjects  15 people  Male; 17-29  Had previously been classified as stutterers or clutterers  Six oral readings of a 300-400 word passage  passage = controlled Experiment

8.  Read passage five successive times  15 people  20-second interval between each  After 5 th, seven-minute “rest,” then 6 th  Experimenter activated a microphone by foot (mic situated 20 inches away from subject)  In front of experimenter was a stopwatch and folder Experiment

9. Stutterers and clutterers differ significantly Frequency

10. Stutterers and clutterers differ significantly Temporal Rate of Speech

12.  Both show a decreasing rate of fluency failure  Mean pause time distinguishes, but mean phonation time does not.  “Thus word length appears to be one of the most important variables associated with the frequency of stuttering. Since stutterers tend to stutter more on polysyllabic words, it might be possible that clutterers also tend to clutter more on words of more than one syllable. This assumption appears to be supported by clinical experience. “ Conclusions

13.  “Clutterers have a significantly higher frequency rate of fluency failureas well as a significantly higher overall temporal rate of speech. Stutterers on the other hand differ significantly from clutterers by having a greater mean pause time. They also show a trend towards lower mean phonation times. It is important to note however that both stutterers and clutterers showed behavior indicative of spontaneous recovery of fluency failure. It is concluded from the above results that the various procedures em- ployed in this study proved adequate diagnostic utility for the differen- tiation of stuttering from cluttering.” Conclusions

14.  “1) Clutterers have a significantly higher rate of fluency failure than stutterers. 2) Clutterers have a significantly higher temporal rate of speech than stutterers; however, both stutterers and clutterers show a progressive decrement in the frequency of fluency failure during massed oral readings, i.e. adaptation effect. 3) Stutterers have a significantly greater mean pause time than clutterers; on the other hand, the measure of mean phonation time did not significantly distinguish stutterers from clutterers. Stutterers do, however, have a trend towards lower mean phonation times. 4) Both stutterers and clutterers showed spontaneous recovery of fluency failure. ” Conclusions