Search

The use of mindfulness training for increasing psychological well-being in a variety of clinical and nonclinical populations has exploded over the last decade. In the area of stuttering, it has been widely recognized that effective long-term management often necessitates treatment of cognitive and affective dimensions of the disorder in addition to behavioral components. Yet, mindfulness based strategies and their possible usefulness in stuttering management have not been described in detail in the literature. This article seeks to engage professionals who treat stuttering in a conversation about the possible usefulness of incorporating mindfulness training into stuttering management. A review of the literature reveals that there is a substantial overlap between what is required for effective stuttering management and the benefits provided by mindfulness practices. Mindfulness practice results in decreased avoidance, increased emotional regulation, and acceptance in addition to improved sensory-perceptual processing and attentional regulation skills. These skills are important for successful long-term stuttering management on both psychosocial and sensory-motor levels. It is concluded that the integration of mindfulness training and stuttering treatment appears practical and worthy of exploration. Mindfulness strategies adapted for people who stutter may help in the management of cognitive, affective, and behavioral challenges associated with stuttering. Educational objectives: Readers should be able to: (1) describe what mindfulness is and how it is cultivated; (2) identify the benefits that can be produced from mindfulness practice; (3) summarize how the benefits of mindfulness practice parallel what is often required for effective long-term stuttering management; and (4) identify specific mindfulness techniques that can be taught in stuttering therapy and explain their rationale.

Bullying in school-age children is a global epidemic. School personnel play a critical role in eliminating this problem. The goals of this study were to examine speech-language pathologists' (SLPs) perceptions of bullying, endorsement of potential strategies for dealing with bullying, and associations among SLPs' responses and specific demographic and practice-oriented variables. A survey was developed and mailed to 1000 school-based SLPs. Six vignettes describing episodes of physical, verbal, and relational bullying of hypothetical 10-year students who stutter were developed. Three vignettes described bullying specifically mentioning stuttering behaviors, while three described bullying without mentioning stuttering behavior. The data from 475 SLPs were analyzed. SLPs rated physical bullying as most serious and in need of intervention, followed by verbal bullying. Relational bullying was rated as not serious or in need of intervention. SLPs also responded to the likelihood of using strategies for dealing with bullying. Physical and verbal bullying elicited the use of "talking with the teacher", "working with school personnel", and "reassuring the child of his safety" strategies. Relational bullying elicited "ignore the problem" and "be more assertive" strategies. Correlations among variables are reported. The seriousness of physical and verbal bullying, likelihood of intervention, and the lack of knowledge about relational bullying is discussed. Educational objectives: Readers should be able to: (1) summarize the research describing the negative effects of three major types of bullying, (2) summarize the research describing bullying and children with communication disorders, especially stuttering, (3) report results of a survey of speech-language pathologists' (SLPs) perceptions of bullying in school-age children, (4) explain the perceived seriousness of the problem by SLPs and likelihood of intervention, and (5) describe the need for continued prevention and intervention activities for children who stutter. (Contains 3 figures and 2 tables.)

This study examined the effects of the perceived cause of stuttering on perceptions of persons who stutter (PWS) using a 7-item social distance scale, a 25-item adjective pair scale and a 2-item visual analogue scale. Two hundred and four university students rated vignettes which varied on describing a PWS with different causalities for stuttering (psychological, genetic, or unknown). Ratings differed significantly according to assigned causality. The vignette with the stuttering due to psychological causes was rated more negatively on 14 adjective pairs and the Social Distance Scale Index when compared to the ratings of vignettes with stuttering caused by either genetic or unknown causes. Interestingly, there were no significant differences between ratings of the vignettes attributing stuttering to either genetic or unknown causes. Neither familiarity with PWS nor the perceived curability of stuttering had any significant association to the ratings. Implications of findings regarding negative stereotypes, stigmatization and perceived causality for PWS are discussed. Educational objectives: Readers will be able to describe and explain: (1) research regarding negative stereotypes and stigma associated with stuttering, (2) research about attribution theory and stigma, (3) two methods used to evaluate stereotypes and stigma in adults, and (4) the negative effects on ratings of PWS due to psychological causality. (Contains 3 figures.)