Behavioral inhibition and childhood stuttering.

Purpose—The purpose of this study was to assess the relation of behavioral inhibition to stuttering and speech/language output in preschool-age children who do (CWS) and do not stutter (CWNS). Method—Participants were preschool-age (ages 36 to 68 months), including 26 CWS (22 males) and 28 CWNS (13 males). Participants’ behavioral inhibition (BI) was assessed by measuring the latency to their sixth spontaneous comment during conversation with an unfamiliar experimenter, using methodology developed by Kagan, Reznick, and Gibbons (1989). In addition to these measures of BI, each participant’s stuttered and non-stuttered disfluencies and mean length of utterance (in morphemes) were assessed. Results—Among the more salient findings, it was found that (1) there was no significant difference in BI between preschool-age CWS and CWNS as a group, (2) when extremely high versus low inhibited children were selected, there were more CWS with higher BI and fewer CWS with lower BI when compared to their CWNS peers, and (3) more behaviorally inhibited CWS, when compared to less behaviorally inhibited CWS, exhibited more stuttering. Conclusions—Findings are taken to suggest that one aspect of temperament (i.e., behavioral inhibition) is exhibited by some preschool-age CWS and that these children stutter more than CWS with lower behavioral inhibition. The present results seem to support continued study of the association between young children’s temperamental characteristics and stuttering, the diagnostic entity (i.e., CWS versus CWNS), as well as stuttering, the behavior (e.g., frequency of stuttered disfluencies)

Young children’s family history of stuttering and their articulation, language and attentional abilities: An exploratory study

Purpose—The purpose of this study was to determine whether young children who do (CWS) and do not stutter (CWNS) with a positive versus negative family history of stuttering differ in articulation, language and attentional abilities and family histories of articulation, language and attention related disorders. Method—Participants were 25 young CWS and 50 young CWNS. All 75 participants’ caregivers consistently reported a positive or negative family history of stuttering across three consecutive time points that were about 8 months apart for a total of approximately 16 months. Each participant’s family history focused on the same, relatively limited number of generations (i.e., participants’ parents & siblings). Children’s family history of stuttering as well as articulation, language, and attention related disorders was obtained from one or two caregivers during an extensive interview. Children’s speech and language abilities were measured using four standardized articulation and language tests and their attentional abilities were measured using caregiver reports of temperament. Results—Findings indicated that (1) most caregivers (81.5% or 75 out 92) were consistent in their reporting of positive or negative history of stuttering; (2) CWNS with a positive family history of stuttering, compared to those with a negative family history of stuttering, were more likely to have reported a positive family history of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and (3) CWNS with a positive family history of stuttering had lower language scores than those with a negative family history of stuttering. However, there were no such significant differences in family histories of ADHD and language scores for CWS with a positive versus negative family history of stuttering. In addition, although 24% of CWS versus 12% of CWNS’s caregivers reported a positive family history of stuttering, inferential analyses indicated no significant differences between CWS and CWNS in relative proportions of family histories of stuttering. Conclusions—Finding that a relatively high proportion (i.e., 81.5%) of caregivers consistently reported a positive or negative family history of stuttering across three consecutive time points should provide some degree of assurance to those who collect such caregiver reports. Based on such consistent caregiver reports, linguistic as well as attentional vulnerabilities appear associated with a positive family history of stuttering, a finding that must await further empirical study for confirmation or refutation

W ANOMALOUS MOMENTS AND THE POLARIZATION ASYMMETRY ZERO IN gamma e --> W nu

We show from general principles that there must be a center of mass energy, $\sqrt s_0$, where the polarization asymmetry $A=\Delta \sigma({\gamma e \to W \nu })/ \sigma({\gamma e \to W \nu })$ for circularly-polarized photon and electron beams vanishes. In the case of the Standard Model, the crossing point where the asymmetry changes sign occurs in Born approximation at $\sqrt s_{\gamma e} = 3.1583\ldots M_W \simeq 254$ GeV. We demonstrate the sensitivity of the position of the polarization asymmetry zero to modifications of the SM trilinear $\gamma W W$ coupling. Given reasonable assumptions for the luminosity and energy range for the Next Linear Collider(NLC) with a backscattered laser beam, we show that the zero point, $\sqrt s_0$, of the polarization asymmetry may be determined with sufficient precision to constrain the anomalous couplings of the $W$ to better than the 1\% level at $95\%$ CL. In addition to the fact that only a limited range of energy is required, the polarization asymmetry measurements have the important advantage that many of the systematic errors cancel in taking cross section ratios. The position of the zero thus provides an additional weapon in the arsenal used to probe anomalous trilinear gauge couplings.Comment: 21 pages, uuencoded postscript file. For hard copy, send e-mail to [email protected]

Classification of Types of Stuttering Symptoms Based on Brain Activity

Among the non-fluencies seen in speech, some are more typical (MT) of stuttering speakers, whereas others are less typical (LT) and are common to both stuttering and fluent speakers. No neuroimaging work has evaluated the neural basis for grouping these symptom types. Another long-debated issue is which type (LT, MT) whole-word repetitions (WWR) should be placed in. In this study, a sentence completion task was performed by twenty stuttering patients who were scanned using an event-related design. This task elicited stuttering in these patients. Each stuttered trial from each patient was sorted into the MT or LT types with WWR put aside. Pattern classification was employed to train a patient-specific single trial model to automatically classify each trial as MT or LT using the corresponding fMRI data. This model was then validated by using test data that were independent of the training data. In a subsequent analysis, the classification model, just established, was used to determine which type the WWR should be placed in. The results showed that the LT and the MT could be separated with high accuracy based on their brain activity. The brain regions that made most contribution to the separation of the types were: the left inferior frontal cortex and bilateral precuneus, both of which showed higher activity in the MT than in the LT; and the left putamen and right cerebellum which showed the opposite activity pattern. The results also showed that the brain activity for WWR was more similar to that of the LT and fluent speech than to that of the MT. These findings provide a neurological basis for separating the MT and the LT types, and support the widely-used MT/LT symptom grouping scheme. In addition, WWR play a similar role as the LT, and thus should be placed in the LT type