راهکارهای درمانی خاص در درمان لکنت زبان کلینیک تخصصی لکنت کرج کلاک-شهرک جهان نما
whereas speaker B’s rate will work out at an abnormally slow 90 SPM (6 syllables/4 seconds x 60). Obviously, this can be misleading. Substituting articulatory rate formulas for speaking rate ones resolves this problem. Alternatively, the rater can make a clear indication in the notes that in terms of communicative content the repetitive behaviour of speaker A is resulting in an inflated SPM figure. To summarize, then:
1 When calculating percentage of syllables stuttered, speaking rate (involv¬ing the counting all syllables) must be used.
2 The use of speaking rate over articulatory rate can sometimes give mis-leadingly high SPM figures when multiple repetitions of syllables and/or words is the primary stuttering feature, as opposed to prolongations and blocks.
Do fluency counts accurately reflect severity?
A common and justified criticism of the fluency count is that it only goes part-way in reflecting the severity of primary stuttering. Compare the hypothetical case of a speaker who produces one instance of single word repetition in a speech sample containing 100 syllables with that of another hypothetical speaker who again has one instance of stuttering in 100 syllables,
Figure 9.2 Identical length phrases with similar degree of stuttering and identical communicative content, but showing very different speaking rates.
but this moment of stuttering consists of a 20-second prolongation with accompanying head movements and tongue thrust. Despite the significant differences between the two speakers, the