Profiles of public attitude change regarding stuttering
Kenneth O. St. Louis , Fauzia Abdalla , Salman Abdi , Elizabeth (Fisher) Aliveto , Ann Beste-Guldborg , Agata Błachnio , Benjamin Bolton-Grant , Sarah Eisert , Timothy Flynn , Sheryl Gottwald , Jessica Hartley , Daniel Hudock , Kia N. Johnson , Lejla Junuzović-Žunić , Aneta Przepiórka , M. Pushpavathi , Isabella Reichel , Hossein Rezai , Chelsea (Kuhn) Roche , Sara Spears , Mohyeddin Teimouri Sangani , Katarzyna Węsierska
Language and Health ›› 2024, Vol. 2 ›› Issue (2) : 10027
Purpose: A growing number of studies have sought to reduce negative public attitudes toward stuttering in pre-test/post-test designs using the Public Opinion Survey of Human Attributes-Stuttering (POSHA-S). Most investigations have succeeded in improving attitudes, but about one-third of them have not. A previous companion study showed that intervention — but not demographic — characteristics of samples partly predicted success. Method: Authors investigated individual profiles and predictors of change in nonstuttering individuals’ attitudes from pre-test to post-test after exposure to interventions or no intervention. Using pre- versus post-POSHA-S mean ratings from different samples (representing 7 countries and 6 languages) 29 samples comprising 934 respondents were categorized into four categories of intervention success from “unsuccessful” to “very successful.” These were compared to 12 pre and post non-intervention samples containing 345 respondents from a second companion study. Within categories, the individual respondents were sorted according to positive, minimal, or negative changes from pre- to post-tests on the POSHA-S Overall Stuttering Score (OSS). The non-intervention category served as a baseline for determining the effects of interventions on respondents who improved, worsened, or remained the same. Results: As in the previous non-intervention category, within all intervention categories, an unexpected and heretofore undocumented “crossover” effect emerged. Respondents with the least positive pre attitudes improved greatly, and respondents with the most positive attitudes worsened greatly. Those with intermediate attitudes changed minimally. The percentage of respondents changing positively differentiated levels of success in the intervention categories, while the magnitude of mean change did not. Potential predictors in positive and negative changers were not apparent from POSHA-S demographic and attitude variables. Implications: Future interventions to improve stuttering attitudes should address their relatively unstable nature and be targeted differentially to positive, minimal, and negative changers.
Stuttering / Changing public attitudes / POSHA-S / Unique profiles / International / “Crossover” effect
| [1] |
Abdalla, F. (2015). Changing attitudes toward stuttering. In K. O. St, & Louis (Eds.), Stuttering meets stereotype, stigma, and discrimination:An overview of attitude research (pp.106-129). Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University Press. |
| [2] |
Abdalla, F., |
| [3] |
|
| [4] |
Ahuwalia, R. (2002). How prevalent is the negativity effect in consumer environments? Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 270-279. |
| [5] |
Babbie, E. (2013). The practice of social research (13th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. |
| [6] |
|
| [7] |
|
| [8] |
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
Boysen, G., A, |
| [11] |
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
Delaney, C. (2001). Modification of the negative stutterer stereotype. In G. Bosshardt, H. J. S. Yaruss, & H. F. Peters (Eds.), Proceedings of World Congress of Fluency Disorders: Theory, Research, Treatment & Self-help (pp. 614-618). Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Nijmegen University Press. |
| [16] |
|
| [17] |
Dholakia, P.M., |
| [18] |
|
| [19] |
Ezanwa, |
| [20] |
Flynn, |
| [21] |
Flynn, |
| [22] |
|
| [23] |
|
| [24] |
|
| [25] |
Hadlaczky, G., |
| [26] |
Harris, S., |
| [27] |
Herz, R.S. (2001). Ah, sweet skunk! Why we like or dislike what we smell. Cerebrum. Retrieved December 1, 2019 from 〈https://www.dana.org/article/ah-sweet-skunk-why-we-like-or-dislike-what-we-smell/〉. |
| [28] |
|
| [29] |
Holcombe, K., |
| [30] |
|
| [31] |
Hughes, S. (2015). Attitudes toward stuttering: An annotated bibliography. In K. O. St. Louis (Ed.), Stuttering meets stereotype, stigma, and discrimination: An overview of attitude research (pp. 310-350). Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University Press. |
| [32] |
|
| [33] |
Junuzović-Zunić L., Weidner, M. E., Reichel, I. K., Cook, S., St. Louis, K. O., & Ware, M. B. (2015). Effects of fluency disorders coursework on students’ stuttering attitudes in two countries. In K. O. St. Louis (Ed.), Stuttering meets stereotype, stigma, and discrimination: An overview of attitude research (pp. 226-242). Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University Press. |
| [34] |
Kestenbaum, J., |
| [35] |
Kuhn, |
| [36] |
|
| [37] |
Langevin, M., |
| [38] |
|
| [39] |
|
| [40] |
Raypole, C. (2019). What is the nocebo effect? Healthline.com. Retrieved December 1, 2019 from https://www.healthline.com/health/nocebo-effect. |
| [41] |
|
| [42] |
Reichel, I., |
| [43] |
Reichel, |
| [44] |
|
| [45] |
Smith, G. (2016). A fallacy that will not die. The Journal of Investing, 25, 7-15. |
| [46] |
Snyder, |
| [47] |
|
| [48] |
|
| [49] |
|
| [50] |
(in press). Measuring public attitudes toward stuttering: Test-retest reliability revisited Clinical Archives of Communication Disorders. |
| [51] |
|
| [52] |
|
| [53] |
|
| [54] |
|
| [55] |
|
| [56] |
|
| [57] |
|
| [58] |
|
| [59] |
|
| [60] |
|
| [61] |
|
| [62] |
|
| [63] |
|
| [64] |
|
| [65] |
|
| [66] |
|
| [67] |
Stork, K., |
| [68] |
|
| [69] |
Trochim, W.M.K. (2020). Regression to the mean. Web Center for Social Research Methods (2021). 〈https://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/regrmean.php.〉. |
| [70] |
|
| [71] |
Weidner, |
| [72] |
|
| [73] |
|
| [74] |
|
| [75] |
Woods, |
| [76] |
Zhang, X., |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |