Geoffrey A. Coalson , Robyn Croft , Courtney T. Byrd
{"title":"口吃成人的工作记忆容量和反刍","authors":"Geoffrey A. Coalson , Robyn Croft , Courtney T. Byrd","doi":"10.1016/j.jfludis.2025.106119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Difficulty discarding irrelevant negative stimuli activated in working memory has been linked to increased rumination. Adults who stutter (AWS) report (a) rumination about communication events, and (b) difficulties during tasks that require manipulation of information held in working memory compared to non-stuttering adults (AWNS). Given the link between rumination and working memory, this study examined whether AWS discard negative stimuli faster or slower compared to AWNS, and whether speed of discarding negative information is linked to generalized rumination.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>To assess the relationship between working memory and rumination, 26 participants (14 AWS, 12 AWNS) completed a version of the Modified Sternberg Task. Participants first memorized wordlists with positive or negative emotional valence. Participants were then cued to recall a specific wordlist, followed by a prompt word that either matched or conflicted with the wordlist. Manual response latency was compared between groups.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>AWS and AWNS exhibit comparable speed when discarding irrelevant stimuli, with both groups slower to discard negative rather than positive irrelevant stimuli. Latency of discarding negative information was not associated with self-reported rumination in AWS.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Preliminary data indicate no differences in the rate at which AWS and AWNS regulate negative stimuli. Additionally, rumination does not appear to be uniquely associated with the speed at which negative information is discarded. Further research is warranted to determine what role, if any, working memory has in the repetitive negative thinking reported by some, but not all, individuals who stutter.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Fluency Disorders","volume":"84 ","pages":"Article 106119"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Working memory capacity and rumination in adults who stutter\",\"authors\":\"Geoffrey A. Coalson , Robyn Croft , Courtney T. Byrd\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jfludis.2025.106119\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Difficulty discarding irrelevant negative stimuli activated in working memory has been linked to increased rumination. Adults who stutter (AWS) report (a) rumination about communication events, and (b) difficulties during tasks that require manipulation of information held in working memory compared to non-stuttering adults (AWNS). Given the link between rumination and working memory, this study examined whether AWS discard negative stimuli faster or slower compared to AWNS, and whether speed of discarding negative information is linked to generalized rumination.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>To assess the relationship between working memory and rumination, 26 participants (14 AWS, 12 AWNS) completed a version of the Modified Sternberg Task. Participants first memorized wordlists with positive or negative emotional valence. Participants were then cued to recall a specific wordlist, followed by a prompt word that either matched or conflicted with the wordlist. Manual response latency was compared between groups.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>AWS and AWNS exhibit comparable speed when discarding irrelevant stimuli, with both groups slower to discard negative rather than positive irrelevant stimuli. Latency of discarding negative information was not associated with self-reported rumination in AWS.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Preliminary data indicate no differences in the rate at which AWS and AWNS regulate negative stimuli. Additionally, rumination does not appear to be uniquely associated with the speed at which negative information is discarded. Further research is warranted to determine what role, if any, working memory has in the repetitive negative thinking reported by some, but not all, individuals who stutter.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Fluency Disorders\",\"volume\":\"84 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106119\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Fluency Disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094730X2500021X\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Fluency Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094730X2500021X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Working memory capacity and rumination in adults who stutter
Purpose
Difficulty discarding irrelevant negative stimuli activated in working memory has been linked to increased rumination. Adults who stutter (AWS) report (a) rumination about communication events, and (b) difficulties during tasks that require manipulation of information held in working memory compared to non-stuttering adults (AWNS). Given the link between rumination and working memory, this study examined whether AWS discard negative stimuli faster or slower compared to AWNS, and whether speed of discarding negative information is linked to generalized rumination.
Method
To assess the relationship between working memory and rumination, 26 participants (14 AWS, 12 AWNS) completed a version of the Modified Sternberg Task. Participants first memorized wordlists with positive or negative emotional valence. Participants were then cued to recall a specific wordlist, followed by a prompt word that either matched or conflicted with the wordlist. Manual response latency was compared between groups.
Results
AWS and AWNS exhibit comparable speed when discarding irrelevant stimuli, with both groups slower to discard negative rather than positive irrelevant stimuli. Latency of discarding negative information was not associated with self-reported rumination in AWS.
Conclusions
Preliminary data indicate no differences in the rate at which AWS and AWNS regulate negative stimuli. Additionally, rumination does not appear to be uniquely associated with the speed at which negative information is discarded. Further research is warranted to determine what role, if any, working memory has in the repetitive negative thinking reported by some, but not all, individuals who stutter.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Fluency Disorders provides comprehensive coverage of clinical, experimental, and theoretical aspects of stuttering, including the latest remediation techniques. As the official journal of the International Fluency Association, the journal features full-length research and clinical reports; methodological, theoretical and philosophical articles; reviews; short communications and much more – all readily accessible and tailored to the needs of the professional.