Profiles of public attitude change regarding stuttering

A growing number of studies have sought to reduce negative public attitudes toward stuttering in pre-test/post-test designs using the Public Opinion Survey of Human Attributes–Stuttering ( POSHA–S ). Most investigations have succeeded in improving attitudes, but about one-third of them have not. A previous companion study showed that intervention—but not demographic—characteristics of samples partly predicted success. Authors investigated individual profiles and predictors of change in nonstuttering individuals’ attitudes from pre-test to post-test after exposure to interventions or no intervention. Using pre- versus post- POSHA–S mean ratings from different samples (representing 7 countries and 6 languages) 29 samples comprising 934 respondents were categorized into four categories of intervention success from “unsuccessful” to “very successful.” These were compared to 12 pre and post non-intervention samples containing 345 respondents from a second companion study. Within categories, the individual respondents were sorted according to positive, minimal, or negative changes from pre- to post-tests on the POSHA–S Overall Stuttering Score (OSS). The non-intervention category served as a baseline for determining the effects of interventions on respondents who improved, worsened, or remained the same. As in the previous non-intervention category, within all intervention categories, an unexpected and heretofore undocumented “crossover” effect emerged. Respondents with the least positive pre attitudes improved greatly, and respondents with the most positive attitudes worsened greatly. Those with intermediate attitudes changed minimally. The percentage of respondents changing positively differentiated levels of success in the intervention categories, while the magnitude of mean change did not. Potential predictors in positive and negative changers were not apparent from POSHA–S demographic and attitude variables. Future interventions to improve stuttering attitudes should address their relatively unstable nature and be targeted differentially to positive, minimal, and negative changers. • Samples first sorted by success of interventions in changing stuttering attitudes. • Pre and post intervention results were compared to non-intervention results. • The best pre attitudes became the worst post attitudes, and vice versa. • The percentage who changed—not magnitude of change—characterized success. • Demographic variables did not predict positive versus negative changers.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Language and Health
Published
2024-11-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.laheal.2024.08.001
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Stuttering Research and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.92
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Profiles of public attitude change regarding stuttering

Kenneth O. St. Louis, Hossein Rezai, M. Pushpavathi, Katarzyna Węsierska et al.
3 citations
Language and Health
Stuttering Research and Treatment
1.92
article

Profiles of public attitude change regarding stuttering

Kenneth O. St. Louis, Hossein Rezai, M. Pushpavathi, Katarzyna Węsierska, Kia N. Johnson, Daniel Hudock, Ann Beste-Guldborg, Benjamin Bolton-Grant, Lejla Junuzović-Žunić, Isabella K. Reichel, Aneta Przepiórka, Mohyeddin Teimouri Sangani, Agata Błachnio, Chelsea Roche, Sarah Eisert, Jessica Hartley, Elizabeth Aliveto, Sara Spears, Timothy W. Flynn, Sheryl R. Gottwald, Fauzia Abdalla, Salman Abdi
article en
3 citations

Abstract

A growing number of studies have sought to reduce negative public attitudes toward stuttering in pre-test/post-test designs using the Public Opinion Survey of Human Attributes–Stuttering ( POSHA–S ). Most investigations have succeeded in improving attitudes, but about one-third of them have not. A previous companion study showed that intervention—but not demographic—characteristics of samples partly predicted success. Authors investigated individual profiles and predictors of change in nonstuttering individuals’ attitudes from pre-test to post-test after exposure to interventions or no intervention. Using pre- versus post- POSHA–S mean ratings from different samples (representing 7 countries and 6 languages) 29 samples comprising 934 respondents were categorized into four categories of intervention success from “unsuccessful” to “very successful.” These were compared to 12 pre and post non-intervention samples containing 345 respondents from a second companion study. Within categories, the individual respondents were sorted according to positive, minimal, or negative changes from pre- to post-tests on the POSHA–S Overall Stuttering Score (OSS). The non-intervention category served as a baseline for determining the effects of interventions on respondents who improved, worsened, or remained the same. As in the previous non-intervention category, within all intervention categories, an unexpected and heretofore undocumented “crossover” effect emerged. Respondents with the least positive pre attitudes improved greatly, and respondents with the most positive attitudes worsened greatly. Those with intermediate attitudes changed minimally. The percentage of respondents changing positively differentiated levels of success in the intervention categories, while the magnitude of mean change did not. Potential predictors in positive and negative changers were not apparent from POSHA–S demographic and attitude variables. Future interventions to improve stuttering attitudes should address their relatively unstable nature and be targeted differentially to positive, minimal, and negative changers. • Samples first sorted by success of interventions in changing stuttering attitudes. • Pre and post intervention results were compared to non-intervention results. • The best pre attitudes became the worst post attitudes, and vice versa. • The percentage who changed—not magnitude of change—characterized success. • Demographic variables did not predict positive versus negative changers.

Language and HealthVol. 2(2)
Idaho State University (US), John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin (PL), Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences (IR), West Virginia University (US), University of Tuzla (BA), University of New Hampshire (US), Touro College (US), Kuwait University (KW), Seattle Photonics Associates (United States) (US), Institute of Education of the Republic of Azerbaijan (AZ), Loudoun County Public Library (US), Institute of Psychology (PL), Laconia Women's Health Center (US), Oceanside Public Library (US), Advanced Cell Diagnostics (United States) (US), University Clinical Center Tuzla (BA), Semnan University of Medical Sciences (IR), Dr. S.R. Chandrasekhar Institute of Speech and Hearing (IN), Fairfax County Public Schools (US), Leeds Beckett University (GB), Minot State University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Stuttering Research and Treatment
1.92
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.