Journal of fluency disorders · 2011
Stuttering severity and educational attainment.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
O'Brian Sue, Jones Mark, Packman Ann, Menzies Ross, Onslow Mark
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study investigated the relationship between self-reported stuttering severity ratings and educational attainment.
METHOD: Participants were 147 adults seeking treatment for stuttering. At pretreatment assessment, each participant reported the highest educational level they had attained and rated their typical and worst stuttering severity on a 9-point scale for a range of speaking situations. These included: (1) talking with a family member, (2) talking with a familiar person, not a family member, (3) talking in a group of people, (4) talking with a stranger, (5) talking with an authority figure such as a work manager or teacher, (6) talking on the telephone, (7) ordering food or drink, and (8) giving their name and address.
RESULTS: There was a significant negative relationship between highest educational achievement and mean self-reported stuttering severity rating for the eight situations.
CONCLUSIONS: Future research is needed to investigate how this result should be addressed in educational institutions.
EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES: The reader will be able to: (1) describe the negative effects of stuttering through childhood to adulthood; (2) identify some of the negative consequences associated with stuttering on peer and teacher relationships, and academic performance at school; and (3) summarise the relationship between stuttering severity and educational attainment.
METHOD: Participants were 147 adults seeking treatment for stuttering. At pretreatment assessment, each participant reported the highest educational level they had attained and rated their typical and worst stuttering severity on a 9-point scale for a range of speaking situations. These included: (1) talking with a family member, (2) talking with a familiar person, not a family member, (3) talking in a group of people, (4) talking with a stranger, (5) talking with an authority figure such as a work manager or teacher, (6) talking on the telephone, (7) ordering food or drink, and (8) giving their name and address.
RESULTS: There was a significant negative relationship between highest educational achievement and mean self-reported stuttering severity rating for the eight situations.
CONCLUSIONS: Future research is needed to investigate how this result should be addressed in educational institutions.
EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES: The reader will be able to: (1) describe the negative effects of stuttering through childhood to adulthood; (2) identify some of the negative consequences associated with stuttering on peer and teacher relationships, and academic performance at school; and (3) summarise the relationship between stuttering severity and educational attainment.