{"title":"儿童口吃的复杂非语言反应抑制和停止冲动","authors":"Levi C. Ofoe, Julie D. Anderson","doi":"10.1016/j.jfludis.2021.105877","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>The primary purpose of this study was to examine complex nonverbal response inhibition and stopping impulsivity in children who do (CWS) and do not stutter (CWNS).</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>A total of 30 CWS and 30 CWNS between the ages of 3;1 and 6;0 (years; months) performed the Peg-Tapping Task (PTT; Diamond & Taylor, 1996; Luria, 1966), in which children were required to tap a dowel once when an examiner taps twice and vice versa. The main dependent variables were the number of practice trials, response accuracy, response latency for accurate responses, and the number of extra taps (i.e., tapping more than two times).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The CWS were less accurate and slower on the PTT than the CWNS, with no differences in the number of practice trials. Furthermore, the CWS, especially boys, produced more extra taps than the CWNS.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Findings revealed that preschool CWS have weaknesses in complex response inhibition and stopping impulsivity in the nonverbal domain compared to CWNS. Taken together, these findings along with those of previous studies indicate that CWS may have weaknesses in inhibition and impulsivity in the nonverbal domain as well as the verbal domain, suggesting a domain-general weakness.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Fluency Disorders","volume":"70 ","pages":"Article 105877"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.jfludis.2021.105877","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Complex nonverbal response inhibition and stopping impulsivity in childhood stuttering\",\"authors\":\"Levi C. Ofoe, Julie D. Anderson\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jfludis.2021.105877\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>The primary purpose of this study was to examine complex nonverbal response inhibition and stopping impulsivity in children who do (CWS) and do not stutter (CWNS).</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>A total of 30 CWS and 30 CWNS between the ages of 3;1 and 6;0 (years; months) performed the Peg-Tapping Task (PTT; Diamond & Taylor, 1996; Luria, 1966), in which children were required to tap a dowel once when an examiner taps twice and vice versa. The main dependent variables were the number of practice trials, response accuracy, response latency for accurate responses, and the number of extra taps (i.e., tapping more than two times).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The CWS were less accurate and slower on the PTT than the CWNS, with no differences in the number of practice trials. Furthermore, the CWS, especially boys, produced more extra taps than the CWNS.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Findings revealed that preschool CWS have weaknesses in complex response inhibition and stopping impulsivity in the nonverbal domain compared to CWNS. Taken together, these findings along with those of previous studies indicate that CWS may have weaknesses in inhibition and impulsivity in the nonverbal domain as well as the verbal domain, suggesting a domain-general weakness.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Fluency Disorders\",\"volume\":\"70 \",\"pages\":\"Article 105877\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.jfludis.2021.105877\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Fluency Disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094730X21000565\",\"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/S0094730X21000565","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}
Complex nonverbal response inhibition and stopping impulsivity in childhood stuttering
Purpose
The primary purpose of this study was to examine complex nonverbal response inhibition and stopping impulsivity in children who do (CWS) and do not stutter (CWNS).
Method
A total of 30 CWS and 30 CWNS between the ages of 3;1 and 6;0 (years; months) performed the Peg-Tapping Task (PTT; Diamond & Taylor, 1996; Luria, 1966), in which children were required to tap a dowel once when an examiner taps twice and vice versa. The main dependent variables were the number of practice trials, response accuracy, response latency for accurate responses, and the number of extra taps (i.e., tapping more than two times).
Results
The CWS were less accurate and slower on the PTT than the CWNS, with no differences in the number of practice trials. Furthermore, the CWS, especially boys, produced more extra taps than the CWNS.
Conclusions
Findings revealed that preschool CWS have weaknesses in complex response inhibition and stopping impulsivity in the nonverbal domain compared to CWNS. Taken together, these findings along with those of previous studies indicate that CWS may have weaknesses in inhibition and impulsivity in the nonverbal domain as well as the verbal domain, suggesting a domain-general weakness.
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.