Title: A Study Investigating the Temperament of SchoolAged Children who Stutter
1A Study Investigating the Temperament of
School-Aged 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
2Outline of the presentation
- Background to the Study
- Study design, participants, methods
- Preliminary Results
- Summary and conclusions
3Temperament 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.
4Temperament 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)
5Temperament 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)
6Temperament of school-aged CWS
-
- School-aged 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introverted, sensitive, withdrawn, insecure,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)
7Current Study
- School-aged CWS (10-15 years)
- Temperament questionnaires
- Self-report as well as parent-report
8Current Study
- Research Questions
- Do school-aged CWS differ from CWNS in terms of
their temperament? - Are there differences between parent- and
self-report of childrens temperament?
9Participants
- 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
10Participants 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.
11Temperament Questionnaire
- Early Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire
Revised (EATQ-R) (Ellis and Rothbart, 2001) - Parent-report and self-report formats used
12Temperament Dimensions
- Activation control
- Affiliation
- Attention
- Fear
- Frustration
- Surgency/high intensity pleasure
-
13Temperament Dimensions
- Inhibitory Control
- Perceptual Sensitivity
- Pleasure Sensitivity
- Shyness
- Aggression
- Depressive Mood
-
-
14Temperament Questionnaire
- Childs questionnaire 103 statements
- Parents questionnaire 62 statements
- Statements rated using a 5-point rating scale
- 1 almost always untrue
- 5 almost always true
-
15Analysis
- 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 - EATQ-R.
16Parent-Report EATQ-R
- Significant differences (pCWS and CWNS
- Attention F (1 ,48 ) 7.17, p0.01
- Inhibitory control F(1, 48) 13.36, p0.001
-
- Shyness F(1, 48) 6.1, p0.02
-
- High intensity pleasure F(1, 48) 4.02, p0.05
-
17Parent-Report EATQ-R
- No significant differences found between CWS and
CWNS - Activation Affiliation
- Aggression Depressive Mood
- Fear Frustration.
-
-
18Parent-Report EATQ-R
- CWS scored lower than CWNS on
- Attention
- Inhibitory control
- High intensity pleasure
-
- CWS scored higher than CWNS on
- Shyness
-
19Self-Report EATQ-R
- No significant differences were found between
the self-reports of CWS and CWNS - Shyness (p 0.09)
20Parent-Report vs Self-Report EATQ-R
- CWS parents vs CWS self
- Significant differences were found between
parent-report and self-report - Activation F(1, 37) 4.17 p0.05
-
- Attention F(1, 37) 4.01, p0.05
-
21Parent-Report vs Self-Report EATQ-R
-
- CWNS parents vs CWNS self
- No significant differences were found between
parent-report and - self-report
22Attention 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
23Attention 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
speech-language 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)
24Inhibitory 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
25Shyness behavioral inhibition to novelty and
challenge, especially social
- Supports findings of earlier studies of
school-aged 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
26Shyness 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?
27High 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?
28High 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?
29Parent-report vs Self-report
- 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?
30Summary
- 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
31Summary
- CWS did not rate themselves as being different to
CWNS on any temperament dimension - Significant differences found between
parent-report and self-report for CWS Activation
and Attention - No significant differences found between
parent-report and self-report for CWNS
32What next?
- Continue subject recruitment
- Complete data analysis group and individual
- Comparison between child and parent temperament
- Analysis of temperament over time
33Acknowledgements
- 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
34Contact Details
- alison.nicholas_at_islingtonpct.nhs.uk