Announcing 'Stammering Research' - Stammering Research - UCL

Stammering Research. Vol. 1.
All suggest previous treatment had not worked. (Was this because it was initiated by
others or not meeting important needs?)
All retain early memories of their stammers at the primary school stage (Is age of
onset related to success of treatment?)
All four cases sought out the Apple House treatment themselves. (Was this a crucial
motivating factor for their success?)
The Apple course was deemed successful because it dealt with the person before the stammer. (How
does this emphasis compare with other participators’ views and other interventions?) In the
questionnaire survey to a cohort of 200, 81 per cent expressed course satisfaction with 89 per cent
in the 7-10 high satisfaction range.
Three reveal relapses in fluency after the course and the necessity to keep up demanding practice.
The fourth had only just completed the course so was not in a position to review this. (Does this
highlight the need for specific support strategies?) 42 per cent of the main cohort were still dysfluent
and unhappy about this with 65 per cent satisfied with their present communication abilities,
rating 15 out of 20 abilities above a 50 per cent satisfaction level .
The course gave self confidence, choice of techniques and support (These cases
availed themselves of support opportunities after the course – is this a vital factor?) 66
per cent of the main cohort expressed greater confidence after the course; 30
per cent felt they had learnt to adapt techniques satisfactorily and 20 per cent
viewed support as important fro them.
The ‘therapist’ factor was seen by all four to be crucial. (How important is this issue to
success and is this a more important factor than the intervention method?)
These common issues throw up questions that point the way to further research and reflection
regarding therapeutic intervention. They suggest we need more precise information on why
interventions work that will involve aspects such as motivation, timing and type of intervention, the
therapist factor as well as follow up strategies. Some of these issues suggest a quantitative approach
would be useful. For example, for those deeming their intervention successful - how many were selfreferrals?
The importance of the client choice of technique and the therapist factor are issues for
reflection and interpretation in qualitative ways. The quantitative data demonstrates how some of these
differences are generalized to the whole population.
Differences in data
Differences in the data are summarized below:
Two participants see their stammer as a life issue and the others answer with a ‘Yo’ (yes and no!)
because they feel it is now in the background rather than the foreground of their lives. (Is this issue
related to degrees of fluency achieved and maintained?)
The stammer is viewed in idiosyncratic ways. (Does this point to different interventions?) The main
cohort data shows 442 ways in which the course helped them and 115 ways that it did not -
demonstrating the large range of needs and views expressed in this population.
Three view the stammer affecting social relationships most whilst two suggest academic progress.
(Does this suggest that social interaction is given strong focus in therapy?)
There were different reasons expressed for seeking referral that encompassed personal and
professional needs. (Do these suggest a different focus in intervention according to specific needs?)
Although the data suggests more similarities than differences, the issues that do vary pose important
questions for both treatment and further investigation. How people think about their stammers is
revealing. John has a visual image of a ‘one-eyed ugly creature’. He describes it as a monster that
constantly attacks in a vicious manner. Paul regards his stammer as feeble and cowardly. This is a
feeling image, but attributed to the stammer rather than himself. Helen expresses her thoughts in terms
of herself, communicating her own strong personal hate and revulsion. There is a more subjective view
expressed here, describing how she feels in response to the stammer, in contrast to the objective views
of the male respondents. Robert thinks of the stammer as a symptom, which is a very clinical
description, showing an ability to detach the subject of dysfluency from the ‘self’ and examine it in an
analytic way.
Gerda Wilson suggests this difference in thinking and feeling about dysfluency has implications for
the ways one deals with the problem. John’s description indicates that he might be a strong visualiser.
It is perhaps significant that he finds neuro-linguistic programming and hypnotherapy, which rely on
visual imaging, as useful techniques in dealing with his problems. Therefore, tapping into the various
thinking and communication styles of clients is a vital ingredient to the success of any management
techniques. This supports a view that participants need techniques that suit the different processing,
representing and organizing capacities they demonstrate.
Comment
283