A Study Investigating the Temperament of SchoolAged Children who Stutter


1
A Study Investigating the Temperament of
SchoolAged Children who Stutter

• Alison Nicholas Ehud Yairi Steve Davis
  Sarah Mangelsdorf Frances Cook and Victoria
  Hamilton
• Michael Palin Centre for Stammering Children
  London UK
• University of Illinois USA
• University College London London UK

2
Outline of the presentation

• Background to the Study
• Study design participants methods
• Preliminary Results
• Summary and conclusions

3
Temperament and Stuttering

• Recent years focus placed on the relationship
  between stuttering and temperament Conture
  2001 Guitar 1998.
• No evidence that particular temperament
  characteristics cause stuttering but proposed
  that temperament may play a role in exacerbating
  and/or maintaining the disorder.

4
Temperament of young CWS

• Young CWS compared with CWNS are
• More active and less able to maintain and shift
  their attention Embrechts et al 2000 Karass et
  al 2006
• Less distractible Anderson et al 2003
• More impulsive and less able to plan and to
  suppress inappropriate responses Embrechts et
  al 2000

5
Temperament of young CWS

• Less adaptable Embrechts et al 2000 Anderson
  et al 2003
• More reactive to environmental stimuli Wakaba
  1998 Karass et al 2006
• Less able to regulate their emotions Karass et
  al 2006

6
Temperament of schoolaged CWS

• Schoolaged CWS rated as more anxious
  introverted sensitive withdrawn insecure
  fearful and less likely to take risks than CWNS
• Fowlie Cooper 1978 Oyler Ramig 1995 and
  Oyler 1996

7
Current Study

• Schoolaged CWS 1015 years
• Temperament questionnaires
• Selfreport as well as parentreport

8
Current Study

• Research Questions
• Do schoolaged CWS differ from CWNS in terms of
  their temperament?
• Are there differences between parent and
  selfreport of childrens temperament?

9
Participants

• 14 CWS and 14 CWNS matched by age gender and
  social background
• Aged between 103 and 149 years
• CWS Mean age 128 yrs CWNS Mean age129 yrs
• Each group consisted of 2 girls and 12 boys
• All CWS referred to the MPC for specialist
  assessment

10
Participants continued

• CWS confirmed as exhibiting stuttering according
  to multiple criteria Yairi Ambrose 1999
• CWNS were recruited either by the CWS or from
  local schools
• CWNS evaluated to be normally fluent following
  the Yairi and Ambrose 1999 guidelines
• English language and literacy levels sufficient
  for questionnaire completion.

11
Temperament Questionnaire

• Early Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire
  Revised EATQR Ellis and Rothbart 2001
• Parentreport and selfreport formats used

12
Temperament Dimensions

• Activation control
• Affiliation
• Attention
• Fear
• Frustration
• Surgency/high intensity pleasure

13
Temperament Dimensions

• Inhibitory Control
• Perceptual Sensitivity
• Pleasure Sensitivity
• Shyness
• Aggression
• Depressive Mood

14
Temperament Questionnaire

• Childs questionnaire 103 statements
• Parents questionnaire 62 statements
• Statements rated using a 5point rating scale
• 1 almost always untrue
• 5 almost always true

15
Analysis

• Multivariate analysis of variance MANOVA was
  used to establish differences between the group
  of CWS and the group of CWNS on each of the
  dimensions on the
• EATQR.

16
ParentReport EATQR

• Significant differences pCWS and CWNS

• Attention F 1 48 7.17 p0.01
• Inhibitory control F1 48 13.36 p0.001
• Shyness F1 48 6.1 p0.02
• High intensity pleasure F1 48 4.02 p0.05
  

17
ParentReport EATQR

• No significant differences found between CWS and
  CWNS
• Activation Affiliation
• Aggression Depressive Mood
• Fear Frustration.

18
ParentReport EATQR

• CWS scored lower than CWNS on
• Attention
• Inhibitory control
• High intensity pleasure
• CWS scored higher than CWNS on
• Shyness

19
SelfReport EATQR

• No significant differences were found between
  the selfreports of CWS and CWNS
• Shyness p 0.09

20
ParentReport vs SelfReport EATQR

• CWS parents vs CWS self
• Significant differences were found between
  parentreport and selfreport
• Activation F1 37 4.17 p0.05
• Attention F1 37 4.01 p0.05

21
ParentReport vs SelfReport EATQR

• CWNS parents vs CWNS self
• No significant differences were found between
  parentreport and
• selfreport

22
Attention the capacity to focus attention as
well as to shift attention when desired

• Younger CWS also found to have poorer attention
  control Embrechts et al 2000 Anderson et al
  2003 Karass et al 2006
• Attention control may contribute to the
  development and persistence of stuttering

23
Attention the capacity to focus attention as
well as to shift attention when desired

• Poor attention control may make it harder for CWS
  to apply the attention required on
  speechlanguage planning and production ?
• CWS with poor ability to shift attention may find
  it harder to move on or let go from
  disruptions or mistakes in their own speech
  Conture Karass et al 2006

24
Inhibitory Control the capacity to plan and
to suppress inappropriate responses

• Young CWS also performed less well in inhibitory
  control Embrechts et al 2000
• Inhibitory control may contribute to the
  development and persistence of stuttering

25
Shyness behavioral inhibition to novelty and
challenge especially social

• Supports findings of earlier studies of
  schoolaged CWS Fowlie Cooper 1978 Oyler
  1996
• Younger CWS found to be slower to adapt to
  novelty and such individuals have tendency to be
  shy Kagan 1989 1994
• Shyness may develop over time may be linked to
  experience of stuttering and contribute to its
  persistence

26
Shyness behavioral inhibition to novelty and
challenge especially social

• Physiological signs linked to shyness increased
  muscle tension Guitar 1998 Kagan et al 1987
• Shyness may contribute to development of
  avoidance behaviours?

27
High intensity pleasurethe pleasure derived
from activities involving high intensity or
novelty

• No difference found between young CWS and CWNS on
  high intensity pleasure dimension Embrechts et
  al 2000
• Pleasure gained from high intensity/novel
  activities may be more linked to the experience
  of stuttering?

28
High intensity pleasurethe pleasure derived
from activities involving high intensity or
novelty

• CWS may attempt to modify their emotions
  perhaps in an attempt to control their
  stuttering?
• Linked to shyness?

29
Parentreport vs Selfreport

• Discrepancy between parent and child report of
  temperament but only for CWS
• Are CWS less insightful about their own
  behaviours compared with parents?
• Are parents influenced by negative stereotypes?
• Is parents anxiety about the stuttering
  influencing their interpretations of childrens
  behaviour?

30
Summary

• Parents of CWS judged them as
• Having poorer attention control
• Less able to plan and to suppress inappropriate
  responses
• More shy
• Gaining less pleasure from high intensity/novel
  activities

31
Summary

• CWS did not rate themselves as being different to
  CWNS on any temperament dimension
• Significant differences found between
  parentreport and selfreport for CWS Activation
  and Attention
• No significant differences found between
  parentreport and selfreport for CWNS

32
What next?

• Continue subject recruitment
• Complete data analysis group and individual
• Comparison between child and parent temperament
• Analysis of temperament over time

33
Acknowledgements

• Association for Research into Stammering in
  Childhood
• Islington Primary Care Trust
• Research grant R01 DC 05210 from the USA
  National Institutes Of Health National
  Institution on Deafness and Other Communication
  Disorders
• Staff at the Michael Palin Centre
• All the parents and children

34
Contact Details

• [e-mail]