PURPOSE: To determine whether phonological processing in adults who stutter (AWS) is disrupted by increased amounts of cognitive load in a concurrent attention-demanding task. METHOD: Nine AWS and 9 adults who do not stutter (AWNS) participated. Using a dual-task paradigm, the authors presented word pairs for rhyme judgments and, concurrently, letter strings for memory recall. The rhyme judgment task manipulated rhyming type (rhyming/nonrhyming) and orthographic representation (similar/dissimilar). The memory recall task varied stimulus complexity (no letters, 3 letters, 5 letters). Rhyme judgment accuracy and reaction time (RT) were used to assess phonological processing, and letter recall accuracy was used to measure memory recall. RESULTS: For rhyme judgments, AWS were as accurate as AWNS, and the increase in the cognitive load did not affect rhyme judgment accuracy of either group. Significant group differences were found in RTs (delays by AWS were 241 ms greater). RTs of AWS were also slower in the most demanding rhyme condition and varied with the complexity of the memory task. Accuracy of letter recall of AWS was comparatively worse in the most demanding 5-letter condition. CONCLUSION: Phonological and cognitive processing of AWS is more vulnerable to disruptions caused by increased amounts of cognitive load in concurrent attention-demanding tasks.
PURPOSE: To determine whether phonological processing in adults who stutter (AWS) is disrupted by increased amounts of cognitive load in a concurrent attention-demanding task. METHOD: Nine AWS and 9 adults who do not stutter (AWNS) participated. Using a dual-task paradigm, the authors presented word pairs for rhyme judgments and, concurrently, letter strings for memory recall. The rhyme judgment task manipulated rhyming type (rhyming/nonrhyming) and orthographic representation (similar/dissimilar). The memory recall task varied stimulus complexity (no letters, 3 letters, 5 letters). Rhyme judgment accuracy and reaction time (RT) were used to assess phonological processing, and letter recall accuracy was used to measure memory recall. RESULTS: For rhyme judgments, AWS were as accurate as AWNS, and the increase in the cognitive load did not affect rhyme judgment accuracy of either group. Significant group differences were found in RTs (delays by AWS were 241 ms greater). RTs of AWS were also slower in the most demanding rhyme condition and varied with the complexity of the memory task. Accuracy of letter recall of AWS was comparatively worse in the most demanding 5-letter condition. CONCLUSION: Phonological and cognitive processing of AWS is more vulnerable to disruptions caused by increased amounts of cognitive load in concurrent attention-demanding tasks.
Authors: Nathan D Maxfield; Wendy L Olsen; Daniel Kleinman; Stefan A Frisch; Victor S Ferreira; Jennifer J Lister Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2016-02-01 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: Erica Lescht; Michael Walsh Dickey; Melissa D Stockbridge; Nan Bernstein Ratner Journal: J Speech Lang Hear Res Date: 2022-02-08 Impact factor: 2.674
Authors: Ranit Sengupta; J Scott Yaruss; Torrey M Loucks; Vincent L Gracco; Kristin Pelczarski; Sazzad M Nasir Journal: Front Hum Neurosci Date: 2019-11-19 Impact factor: 3.169