Marta Węsierska, Kenneth O. St. Louis - bazhum.muzhp.plbazhum.muzhp.pl/media/files/Chowanna/Chowanna-r2014-t1/Chowann… · Marta Węsierska, Kenneth O. St. Louis ... 2 B. Guitar:

Marta Węsierska, Kenneth O. St.Louis

Comparison of attitudes towardsstuttering among Polish and Englishuniversity studentsChowanna 1, 263-284

2014

Marta WęsierskaUniversityof York,UK

Kenneth O. St. LouisWestVirginiaUniversity,Morgantown,USA

Comparison of attitudes towards stuttering among Polish and English university students

Introduction

Facts about Stuttering

AccordingtoBloodstein,1itisnearlyimpossibletodevelopunambigu-ousdefinitionsofstutteringandfluency.Stutteringisadisruptionoffluency inspeech,usuallyoccurringat the initialsoundsorwords ina sentence,oratwords/clauseboundaries.Threemainpatternsofstut-teringaretypicallyreported,thatisrepetitionsofsoundsandsyllables(usuallythreeormoretimes),soundprolongations,andblocksfollowedbyaburstofsounds.Oftensecondarybehaviourssuchastensioninlips,jawsorcheeksorclosingeyesortappingwithfingers(e.g.onadesk)aresometimespresent.Malesaremorelikelytostutterthanfemales.2Stut-teringusuallybeginsbetweentheagesoftwoandfour.Approximately5%ofallchildrengothroughaperiodofstutteringthatlastssixmonthsormore.Three-quartersofthosewillrecoverbylatechildhood,whichmeansthatforabout1%ofchildrentheproblembecomesalong-termone.3

1 O. Bloodstein: “On pluttering, skivering and floggering: a commentary.”Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders,1990,vol.55,pp.392–393.

2 B. Guitar: Stuttering: An integrated approach to its nature and treatment.Bal-timore:LippincottWilliams&Wilkins,2006.

3 D. Ward: Stuttering and Cluttering. Frameworks for understanding and treat-ment.Hove:PsychologyPress,2006.

MartaWęsierska,KennethO.St.Louis264

Eventhoughithastobeadmittedthattheexactcausesofstutteringarenotknown,researchersagreethatitlikelyresultsfromaninteractionoffactorsincludingchilddevelopment,familydynamics,genetics,andneurophysiology.4

Public Attitudes toward Stuttering

Thefollowingreviewwillshowthatextensiveresearchhasdemonstratedthatnon-stutteringmembersofthepublicholdnegativeorstigmatiz-ingattitudestowardsthosewhodostutter.Researchershaveexploredattitudestowardsstutteringamongdifferentgroups,suchasparents,5teachers,6students,7andemployers.8

Need for a Standard Measure of Public Attitudes

Comparisonoffindingsacrossinvestigationsisdifficultduetotheuseoflargelydifferentscalesandquestionnaires.Aswillbecomeapparent,eventhoughanextensiveliteraturefromdifferentculturesandcountriesexists,untilrecentlynostandardandwidelyacceptedpublicopinioninstrumentshavebeenavailable.ThePublicOpinionSurveyofHumanAttributes-Stuttering(POSHA-S)wascreatedtoaddressthisneed.Inthe POSHA-S, stuttering is compared to other stigmatized attributes(i.e.obesityandmentalhealth),aneutralattribute(i.e.left-handedness),andapositiveattribute(i.e.intelligence).Allthesurveyquestionsarewordedinadirectandneutralmannerandtheuseofidiomaticexpres-sionsisminimizedinordertoaidreadingcomprehensionaswellastoreduceculturalbiasandprovideformostaccuratetranslations.Thetoolhasbeenshowntobeaccuratelytranslatable,9andtomanifestsatisfac-

4 B.GuitarB:Stuttering…5 T.A. Crowe, E.B. Cooper: “Parental attitudes toward and knowledge of

stuttering.”Journal of Communication Disorders,1977,vol.10,pp.343–357.6 T.A. Crowe, J.H. Walton: “Teacherattitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of

Fluency Disorders,1981,vol.6,pp.163–174.7 K.O. St. Louis, N.J. Lass: “A survey of communicative disorders stu-

dents’ attitudes toward stuttering.” Journal of Fluency Disorders, 1981, vol. 6,pp.49–80.

8 M.A. Hurst, E.B. Cooper: “Employerattitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1983,vol.8,pp.1–12.

9 K.O.St. Louis,P.M.Roberts:“Measuringattitudestowardstuttering:En-glish-to-FrenchtranslationsinCanadaandCameroon.”Journal of Communication Disorders,2010,vol.43,pp.361–377.

Comparisonofattitudestowardsstuttering… 265

torytest-retestreliability,constructvalidity,userfriendliness,andef-ficiency.10

A Sampling of Research on Public Attitudes

AstudybyBetz,BloodandBlood11investigatedstudentattitudestowardsstuttering,focusingonstutteringinpre-schoolersandkindergartenpu-pils.Universitystudentsassignedsignificantlymorenegativeratingstoachildasyoungasthreeyearsofagebasedonastatementinascenarioaboutthechildinwhich“He/shestutters”wasincluded.

Otherstudieshaveshownthatnegativeattitudesalsohavebeenat-tributedtoyouth,adolescentsoradults.Forexample,Craig,TranandCraig12investigatedtheattitudestowardstutteringofthosewhohaveneverdirectlymetanyonewiththedisorder.Theyreportedthatamajor-ityoftheiradultparticipantsbelievedthatpeoplewhostutterareshy,self-conscious,anxious,andlackinginconfidence.Theydemonstratedlittleknowledgeofthecausesofstutteringbutbelievedtheywouldnotfeelembarrassedwhiletalkingtosomeonewhostutters.Toexplainsomeofthenegativeattitudes,Craig,TranandCraighypothesizedthatitwaslikelythattheparticipantsbasedtheiropinionsoninferenceor,alterna-tively,projectedtheirownstereotypicbeliefsorexpectedreactionsontothestutterers.Ontheotherhand,evenparticipantswhohadnevermetapersonwhostuttersseemedtohaveanappreciationforthedifficulties

10 Cf. T.W. Flynn, K.O. St. Louis: An investigation of adolescent opinions on stuttering.PosterpresentedatAnnualConventionoftheAmericanSpeech–Lan-guage–HearingAssociation,Boston,MA,2007;K.O. St. Louis etal.:“Develop-mentofaprototypequestionnairetosurveypublicattitudestowardstuttering:Principlesandmethodologiesinthefirstprototype.”The Internet Journal of Epide-miology,2008,vol.5(2);K.O. St. Louis etal.:“Developmentofaprototypeque-stionnairetosurveypublicattitudestowardstuttering:Reliabilityofthesecondprototype.” Contemporary Issues in Communication Sciences and Disorders, 2009,vol.36,pp.101–107;K.O. St. Louis etal.:“Developmentofaprototypequestion-nairetosurveypublicattitudestowardstuttering:Constructvalidity.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2009,vol.34,pp.11–28;K.O.St. Louis:“Researchanddevelop-ment forapublicattitude instrument forstuttering.” Journal of Communication Disorders,2012,vol.45,pp.129–146.

11 I.R. Betz, G.W. Blood, I.M. Blood: “Universitystudents’perceptionsofpre-schoolandkindergartenchildrenwhostutter.”Journal of Communication Dis- orders,2007,vol.41,pp.259–273.

12 A. Craig, Y. Tran, M. Craig: “Stereotypestowardsstutteringforthosewhohaveneverhaddirectcontactwithpeoplewhostutter:Arandomizedandstratifiedstudy.”Perceptual and Motor Skills,2003,vol.97,pp.235–245.


ofthedisordersuchasnotbeingabletotalkfluentlyandhavingtofacesocialembarrassment.

AstudybyHughesetal.13withasampleofuniversitystudents,exploredhowfluentspeakersperceivedpeoplewhostutterfromtwoperspectives,thatistheirbeliefsontheeffectsofstutteringonthelifeofapersonandhowsuchaperson’slifewouldbeaffectediftheystuttered.Theresultsindicatedthatstudentsperceivestutteringtohavebothgeneralandspe-cificnegativeeffectsforpeoplewhostutter.Theybelievedthatpeoplewhostutterareavoided,teased,anddiscriminatedagainst.Accordingtotheresearchers,however,fluentspeakersdonotbelievepeoplestutterbecausetheyareinherentlyshy,nervous,anxious,orfrustrated(constructsthatareexploredinthePOSHA-S).

Hughes14summarizedstudiesofattitudestowardsstutteringinmalesversusfemales,focusingonthesexoftherespondentaswellasthesexofthepersonwhostutters.Thisresearchestablishedthatthepartici-pantsbelievedtraitssuchasshyness,nervousnessorfrustrationwerenotinherentforpeoplewithstuttering(PWS)butratheracquiredovertimeasaresultofthenegativesocialreactionstheyhadexperienced.Theparticipantsprovidedpositivedescriptionsofpeoplewhostutterlargelyassociatedwiththeircomparabilitytoaverageindividualsandbelievedthemtobemorepatientandacceptingduetotheirdisorder.Hughesdidnot,however,findthenumberofstatementstothesurveyquestionstodifferwithrespecttothesexofthepersonwhostutters.Shecontrastedherresultswiththoseof(a)PattersonandPring,15wherenodifferenceswerefoundtowardseithersexofpeoplewhostutterregardlessofthesexoftherespondent,(b)BurleyandRinaldi,16wheremorenegativeattitudeswerereportedbymalerespondentscomparedtofemalere-spondents,and(c)WeiselandSpektor,17wheremorenegativeattitudeswereobservedtowardsmalesthantowardsfemales.UsingthePOSHA-S,

13 S. Hughes etal.:“Universitystudents’explanationsfortheirdescriptionsofpeoplewhostutter:Anexploratorymixedmodelstudy.”Journal of Fluency Dis- orders,2010,vol.35,pp.280–298.

14 S. Hughes: Exploring attitudes toward people who stutter: A mixed model ap-proach.Unpublisheddissertation.BowlingGreen,OH:BowlingGreenStateUni-versity,2008.

15 J. Patterson, T. Pring: “Listenerattitudestostutteringspeakers:Noevi-denceforagenderdifference.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1991,vol.16,pp.201–205.

16 P.M. Burley, W. Rinaldi: “Effects of sex of listener and of stutterer onratingsofstutteringspeakers.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1986,vol.17,pp. 329–333.

17 A. Weisel, G. Sektor: “Apossibleexplanationofthe‘stutterer’stereoty-pe.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1998,vol.23,pp.157–172.


St.Louis18concludedthatmalesandfemalesdonotholdsignificantlydifferentattitudestowardsstuttering.

International Comparisons of Stuttering Attitudes

InternationalstudieswiththeuseofthePOSHA-Shavebeencarriedoutinmanycountriesaroundtheworld,suchasTurkey,19Kuwait,20andChi-na(HongKong).21Employingaschool-based,representativeprobabilitysamplingschemeinOzdemir,St.Louis,Topbas,22thePOSHA-Swasad-ministered toelementaryschoolchildrenandtheirrelativesandneigh-boursfromtwoneighbourhoods.Attitudestowardsstutteringwereverysimilaramongthegenerationsandbetweenthetworepeatedsamples.TheattitudestowardstutteringweregenerallylesspositivefortheTurkishrespondentswhencomparedtoattitudesfromotherstudiesconductedinternationally.AbdallaandSt.Louis23usedamodifiedPOSHA-Stoin-vestigatetheattitudestowardsstutteringamongteachersinKuwait.Theresultsshowedthateventhoughmanyoftheparticipantsknewapersonwhostutters,theywereoftenmisinformedaboutthecausesofstutter-ingandheldstereotypicalviewsaboutthedisorder. Ipetal.24conductedastudyinvestigatingtheattitudestowardsstutteringamongaconveniencesampleinHongKongandMainlandChina.Meanratingsofrespondentswerereportedtobesimilarinmostcomparisons.WhencomparedtoothermeanvaluesinthePOSHA-Sdatabase(consistingofnumerouscountriesandlanguages25),theChineserespondentsmanifestedlower(worse)at-titudesthanthemediansamplepreviouslyanalysed.Overall,thesethreestudiesdocumentedaspectsofnegativestereotypesandpotentialstigma

18 K.O.St. Louis:“Maleversusfemaleattitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of Communication Disorders,2012,vol.45,pp.246–253.

19 R.S. Ozdemir, K.O. St. Louis, S. Topbas: “Stuttering attitudes amongTurkishfamilygenerationsandneighborsfromrepresentativesamples.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2011,vol.36,pp.318–333.

20 F.A. Abdalla, K.O. St. Louis: “Arabschoolteachers’knowledge,beliefsand reactions regarding stuttering.” Journal of Fluency Disorders, 2012, vol. 37,pp.54–69.

21 M.L. Ip etal.:“StutteringattitudesinHongKongandadjacentMainlandChina.”Journal of Speech-Language Pathology,2012,vol.14,pp.543–556.

22 R.S.Ozdemir,K.O.St. Louis,S.Topbas:“Stutteringattitudes…”23 F.A. Abdalla, K.O.St. Louis: “Arabschoolteachers’knowledge…”24 M.L. Ipetal.:“StutteringattitudesinHongKong…”25 K.O. St. Louis: “The Public Opinion Survey of Human Attributes-Stut-

tering(POSHA-S):Summaryframeworkandempiricalcomparisons.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2011,vol.36,pp.256–261.


withrespecttopeoplewhostutter.Bycontrast,Pachigar,Stansfield,andGoldbart26exploredtheattitudesofprimaryschoolteachersinIndiato-wardsstuttering.Thisstudydevelopeditsownquestionnairespecifictothesampleinvestigated,basedonothersalreadyexistinginthefield.Theresponsesshowedagenerallypositiveattitudetowardspeoplewhostutter.Theteachersalsoclaimedtheytreatpupilswhostutterthesamewaytheywouldtreatotherchildren,alsointermsofpublicspeaking.

ThePOSHA-Scomparesstutteringtootherattributesandconditions.St.Louis27presentedselectedfindingsfrompilotstudiesthatusedanex-perimentalversionofthePOSHA-Sfromninesamples:AmericanSLPswhoweregeneralists,AmericanSLPswhowerefluencyspecialists,Ameri-canstudents,andadultsfromDenmark,SouthAfrica,Nepal,Brazil,Bul-gariaandTurkey.Thelastthreesampleswerefromtranslatedquestion-naires.ParticipantsfromthesixcountriesshowedsimilaritiestoprofilesofadultsintheUSaswellassomeinterestingvariations.Forexample,theimpressionofstutteringwasthelowestitemscoredfortheTurkishrespondentswhileBrazilianandBulgarianadultsbothscoredmentalill-nessasthelowest.TheAmericanSLPsagreedongeneticsbeingacauseofstuttering.Intheinternationalsample,onlytheDanishgroupbelievedthatpsychologicaletiologywasnotthestrongestcausalcomponent,nordidtheybelievestutteringislearned.Bycontrast,alltheotherlaygroupsratedpsychologicaletiologythestrongest.Thisresearchshowedthatpeo-pleacrossculturesperceivestutteringalmostasnegativelyasmentalill-nessandobesity.

Changing Public Attitudes toward Stuttering

Craig28wrotethatifthosewhostuttercould,byamoreeducatedpublic,facepositiveorevenneutralpublicreactionsintheirsocialenvironment,theimpactoftheirstutteringwouldbelessdebilitating.Thiswouldim-provethestutterers’qualityoflife.Ofcourse,increasedaccuratepublicawarenesswouldonlybesuccessfuliftheenvironment,whenprovidedwithsucheducation,wasmoreunderstandingandempathicandbehavedlessdiscriminately.

26 V.Pachigar, J.Stansfield, J.Goldbart:“Beliefsandattitudesofprima-ryschoolteachersinMumbai,Indiatowardschildrenwhostutter.”International Journal of Disability, Development and Education,2011,vol.58,pp.287–302.

27 K.O. St. Louis: “Aglobalprojecttomeasurepublicattitudesaboutstut-tering.”The ASHA Leader,2005.

28 A. Craig: “Theassociationbetweenqualityoflifeandstuttering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2010,vol.35,pp.159–160.


Severalstudieshavebeenreportedthathaveattemptedtoprovidein-formationandimprovestutteringattitudes.McGee,KalinowskiandStu-art29reportedthatparticipantsdisplayedanevenmorenegativeattitudetowardsstutteringafterwatchingavideopresentationaboutthedisorder,suggestingthatthemessageshownappearedtoreinforcepre-existingstereotypestowardsthedisorder.Snyder30showedthatafact-orientedclinicalvideoofseverestutteringwasmoreeffectiveinchangingatti-tudesthanaprofessionallymadevideothatfocusedontheemotionsofstuttering.ApreliminarystudybyFlynnandSt.Louis31showedthatafterapresentationaboutstutteringbyoneoftheresearchers,whohimselfstut-tered,participantsshowedanimprovementintheirattitudesonmostoftheitemsonthePOSHA-Sscale.Afollow-upstudybyFlynnandSt.Louis32alsoshowedthatstudents’attitudestowardsstutteringwereimprovedbyapresentationaboutstuttering.Itdemonstratedthatanoralpresenta-tionbyanactualstuttererwasmoreeffectivethanavideo.Theauthorsdiscussedpreviousstudiesinthisareautilizingclassroompresentations,personalexperienceswithPWS,andvideosorfilms,pointingoutthateachoftheseinterventionshasitsadvantagesanddisadvantages.Theycon-cludedthatpresentationsbypeoplewhostutteraremorelikelytogenerateanintenseandpersonalimpact,buttheyaredifficulttoreplicate.Videos,ontheotherhand,thougheasiertoreplicate,lackthepotentialimpactofaninteractionwithastutterer.

Purposes

Thepresentstudyaddressesthefollowingexperimentalquestions:– Towhatextentdodifferencesinattitudestowardsstutteringexistbe-

tweenPolishandEnglishuniversitystudents?– TowhatextentdoesattendingacourseonstutteringaffectPolishstu-

dents’attitudestowardstutteringcomparedtoashorttextonstutteringorADHDinbothPolishandEnglishstudents?

29 L. McGee, J. Kalinowski, A. Stuart: “Effectofavideotapedocumen-taryonhighschoolstudents’perceptionsofahighschoolmalewhostutterers.”Journal of Speech–Language Pathology and Audiology,1996,vol.20,pp.240–246.

30 G.J. Snyder: “Exploratory research in the measurement and modifica-tion of attitudes toward stuttering.” Journal of Fluency Disorders, 2001, vol. 26,pp.149–160.

31 T.W. Flynn, K.O. St. Louis: An investigation of adolescent opinions on stut-tering.PosterpresentedatAnnualConventionoftheAmericanSpeech–Langua-ge–HearingAssociation,Boston,MA,2007.

32 T.W. Flynn, K.O. St. Louis: “Changingadolescentattitudestowardstut-tering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2011,vol.36,pp.110–121.


– TowhatextentarePolishandEnglishstudents’attitudestowardstut-teringaffectedbytheirgender?

– TowhatextentarePolishandEnglishstudents’attitudestowardstut-teringaffectedbytheirself-ratedknowledgeofstuttering?

Method

Questionnaire and Stimuli

ThequestionnaireusedtomeasurestutteringattitudeswasthePOSHA-S.33Itasksdemographicquestionsabouttheindividual’sage,yearsofeduca-tion,gender,race,religion,perceivedincome,andlanguagesspoken.Italsoasksrespondentstoratetheimportanceofcertainaspectsofhealth,abilities,andlifepriorities,suchasfreedom,safety,andfreewill.Ageneralsectionasksfortherespondent’sopinionsonstutteringincomparisonwithotherattributesrangingfrompositive(intelligence)toneutral(left-handedness)tostigmatized(obesity,mentalillness).ThefinaldetailedsectionofPOSHA-S,focusesonstuttering,asksquestionsaboutthere-spondent’sknowledgeofthedisorder,attitudestowardsit,andthoughts,emotions,andbehaviourstheywouldhaveduringaninteractionwithapersonwhostutters(seeAppendices1and2).Thequestionnairewasfivepagesinlength.Itconsistedofclosedquestionswhereinparticipantswereaskedtochoosetheanswertheythoughtmostappropriatelydescribedtheirbeliefs.Inthegeneralsection,responseswereratedonascaleof1to5andinthestutteringsection,“yes,”“no,”or“notsure.”ThePolishtranslationwasusedbypermissionofthepublisher.

Thestudyalsoutilizedprintedtextsonstutteringandattention-deficit/hyperactivitydisorder(ADHD).ThestutteringtextwastakenonlinefromtheStutteringFoundationofAmericawebsiteandtheADHDtextfromthe ADDitudeMag website. The two texts were around 250 words inlengthandweresimilarinformat.Bothdebunkedfivemythsinvolvingnegativeperceptionsofthedisorderandendedupshowingeachdisorderinapositivelight.

33 K.O. St. Louis: “The Public Opinion Survey of Human Attributes-Stut-tering(POSHA-S)…”


Participants

Thestudysamplesincluded272studentvolunteersfromtheUniversityofSilesiainPolandandtheUniversityofWarwickinEngland.Participantswereapproachedinthelibrary,undergraduatecommonroom,outsidelec-turehallsandseminarrooms.InEnglandthedatawascollectedbyMartaWęsierska.InPoland,however,theresearcherwasaidedbyfourindividu-alsfromtheUniversityofSilesia.Theassistantsweretrainedtodeliverthequestionnairesinexactlythesamemanneraswasusedbytheauthor.

Experimental Procedures

Aftersigningconsentforms,participantswereaskedtofilloutaquestion-naireaboutattitudestowardstuttering.Iftheyagreed,theywerethenaskedtoreadtheinstructionsonthefrontpageofthequestionnaire.Next,someparticipants(seebelow)wereaskedtoreadashorttextabouteitherstutteringorADHD.Next,theywereaskedtofilloutthequestionnaire,whichrequiredabout10minutes.Allstudentsweredebriefedaftercom-pletingthequestionnaire.

Theparticipantsconsistedofsevensamplegroups,threeintheUKandfourinPoland.ThePolishgroupswereasfollows:acontrolgroup(63stu-dents),agroupwithpreviousknowledgeaboutstuttering(50students),anADHDtextgroup(25students),andastutteringtextgroup(34students).TheEnglishsampleconsistedofthreegroups:controlgroup(50students),ADHDtextgroup(20students),andstutteringtextgroup(30students).ThePolishgroupwithpreviousknowledgewerestudentswhotookamod-uleinstutteringandspeechdisordersaspartoftheirdegree,butthesestudentswerenotintrainingtobecomespeechandlanguagetherapists.Theothergroupsconsistedmostlyofpsychologystudentsandstudentsofotherhumanisticsubjectssuchaspedagogyandlanguagestudies.Thesewereanopportunitysampleofparticipantswhoweremostaccessibletotheresearchers.

Data Analysis

QuestionnairedatawereenteredintoseparateMicrosoftExcelspread-sheetsforeachofthegroups.Thequestionmarkanswersweregiventhevalue‘0’whichindicatedaneutralresponseandyes/noanswerswerecon-vertedinto1and-1dependingonwhethertheresponsewaspositive(withrespecttoattitudeorknowledge)ornegative.Theseresponseswerethenaddedupforeachparticipant.


Participantsscoredinatotalofsixareas.Attitudetowardsstutteringconsistedofscoresfor:“Peoplewhostuttershould…”withquestionsaboutjobs,life,choicesandpersonaltraits;worryifvariouspeoplestuttered,reactionsandfeelingswhiletalkingtoastutterer,andsourcesofhelpforstuttering.Accuracyofstutteringknowledgewasbasedontheirresponsestoitemsrelatingtothecauseofstuttering.

Aratingofgeneticinheritancewasregardedastheonlycorrectre-sponseinthelistofpotentialcauses.Thustheyreceivedthehighestac-curacyscoresiftheychose“yes”forgeneticinheritanceand“no”fortheotherchoices.Knowingapersonwithastutteringdisorderwasdeter-minedaspartofaquestionaskingwhethertheparticipantknewpeoplewhostuttered(alongwiththefourotherattributes).Ratingofaperson’sownspeakingabilitywastakenfromthedemographicsectionwhereinrespondentsratedtheirspeakingandlearningabilityalongwiththeirphysicalandmentalhealth.Generaltolerancewasdeterminedbyrat-ingsinthegeneralsectiononoverallimpression.Thequestionaboutleft-handednesswasleftoutasitwastheonlyneutralattribute.Perceivedamountofknowledgeofstutteringcamefromthequestion“TheamountIknowaboutpeoplewhohaveastutteringdisorder”answeredonascaleof1to5.

One-wayANOVAswererunforeachofthesixvariables(attitudes,accuracy,familiarityorknowingsomeonewhostutters,self-perceivedspeakingability,generaltolerance,andknowledge)withthesevensam-plegroups.TheFisher’sLSDwascarriedoutforallpairwisecontrastonsignificantANOVAs.

Results

One-wayANOVAsrevealedasignificantdifferencebetweenthegroupsontheattitudescore(F(6,256)=3.41,p<.05),accuracyofknowledgescore(F(6,256)=5.10,p<.05),generaltolerance(F(6,256)=5.35,p<.05)andperceivedknowledge(F(6,256)=15.38,p<.05).Therewasnosignificantdifferencebetweenthesevenconditionsonrespondents’ownspeechrat-ing(F(6,256)=1.69,p>.05).Theonlysignificantdifferencefoundbetweenmaleandfemalerespondentswasongeneraltolerance(femalesscoredhigher)(F(1,269)=9.60,p<.05).

Interestingly,noneoftherespondentsinanyofthegroupsreportedhavingastutteringdisorder.Mostpeopledidknowsomeonewhostut-tered.Whenknowingapersonwhostutters,therewasasignificantdif-ferenceinattitudescore(higherifyes)(F(1,270)=11.42,p<.05),accuracyofknowledge(lowerifyes)(F(1,270)=4.75,p<.05),generaltolerance(higherifyes)(F(1,270)=6.04,p<.05)andperceivedknowledge(higher


ifyes)(F(1,270)=25.24,p<.05).APearsonproduct-momentcorrelationcoefficientwascalculatedbetweenperceivedknowledgeandaccuracyofknowledgebutwasnon-significant(R(272)=−.08,p>.05).

Table 1

Meanratingsforthesixvariablescreatedfromtheitemsforthepurposeofthisstudy,fromthesevensamplesofuniversitystudentsandF-valuesfromone-wayANOVAsconductedforeachvariable

Variablesanalysedinthepresentstudy

Poland UK

F-va

lue

foro

ne-w

ay

AN

OVA

Spee

chTh

erap

ym

odul

e

Stutt

erin

g

info

rmat

ion

ADH

Din

form

atio

n

Cont

rol

Stutt

erin

g

info

rmat

ion

ADH

D

info

rmat

ion

Cont

rol

Attitudetowardsstuttering 10.52 9.74 8.24 7.59 11.57 11.75 8.80 3.41

Accuracyofknowledge 2.20 2.74 1.56 1.59 3.57 2.70 2.82 5.10

Knowingapersonwhostutters(%) 64.00 61.76 68.00 55.56 46.67 55.00 56.00 .077

Ratingofownspeakingability 4.36 4.00 4.44 4.03 4.03 4.20 4.34 1.69

Generaltolerance 1.60 0.97 1.36 0.70 −0.40 0.25 0.12 5.35Perceivedamountofknowledgeofstuttering

3.56 2.56 2.68 2.52 1.97 1.85 1.92 15.38

Table 2

Meanscoresonthefivequestionsforparticipantswhodidordidnotknowsomeonewhostutters

Typeofparticipants

Attitudescore

Accuracyofknowledge

Perceivedspeakingability

Generaltolerance

Perceivedknowledge

Participantswhoknowsomeonewhostutters

8.1 2.6 4.01 0.4 2.1

Participantswhodidnotknowanyonewhostutters

10.4 2.1 4.30 0.9 2.8

Fortheattitudemeasure,theresultswereasfollows:thegroupofPolishstudentswithpreviousknowledgeofstutteringscoredsignificantlyhigh-erthanthePolishcontrolgroup.Furthermore,theEnglishcontrolgroupscoredhigherthanthePolishcontrolgroup.ThesestudentsalsoscoredlowerthanthePolishgroupwithpreviousknowledge,howeverthisresultwasnotsignificantstatistically.EnglishstudentswhoreadboththeADHDandthestutteringtextbeforecompletingthequestionnairescoredhigherthanboththePolishandEnglishcontrolgroups.TherewasnosignificantdifferencebetweenPolishandEnglishstudentswhoreadthetextabout


stuttering.ButthisdifferencecouldbeobservedintheADHDtextcondi-tion,wheretheEnglishstudentsperformedbetter.Overallinthismeasure,thePolishcontrolgroupshadthelowestscoresandtheEnglishstutteringgroupscoredthehighest.

Relativetoaccuracyofknowledge,theEnglishcontrolgroupstudentsscoredsignificantlyhigherthanPolishcontrols.Therewasalsoasignifi-cantdifferencebetweenthePolishcontrolgroupandthegroupwhoseparticipantsweregivenatextaboutstuttering;thelattergroupscoredhigher.ThiswasnotthecaseforthePolishADHDgroupcomparedtothePolishcontrolgroup.Therewas,however,asignificantdifferencebetweenPolishADHDandPolishstutteringgroups,withthelatterscoringhigher.ThelowestscoreswereobtainedbythePolishcontrolandADHDgroup.ThePolishstutteringgroupscoredthehighest.

Onthegeneraltolerancemeasure,theEnglishstutteringconditionob-tainedthelowestscoresandthePolishgroupwithpreviousknowledgescoredthehighest.Furthermore,thePolishgroupwithpreviousknow-ledgescoredhigherthanthePolishcontrols,andsodidtheEnglishstut-teringgroup.TheEnglishcontrolgroupscoredlowerthanthePolishgroupwithpreviousknowledge.TherewasasignificantdifferencebetweentheADHDandstutteringgroupsinbothcountrieswithPolishstudentsscor-inghigherinboth.

Perceivedknowledgewasalsoassessedfordifferencesbetweengroups.Firstly,thePolishgroupwithpreviousknowledgeofstutteringscoredhigherthanthePolishcontrolaswellastheEnglishcontrol.ThePolishcontrolgroupalsoscoredsignificantlyhigherthantheEnglishcontrol.ThePolishgroupwithpreviousknowledgescoredhigherthanboththePolishADHDandstutteringgroups.ThePolishADHDgroupscoredhigherthantheEnglishADHDgroup.Also,thePolishstutteringgroupscoredhigherthantheEnglishone.

Discussion

Relativetothefirstpurpose,thisstudyrevealedseveralsignificantdif-ferencesbetweenPolishandEnglishstudentsonallmeasures.Polishstudentsbelievedthattheyhadmoretoleranceandhavemoreknowledgeaboutstuttering.Englishstudents,however,showedamorepositiveat-titudetowardsstuttering,andtheirknowledgeofthisdisorderwasmoreaccurate.

Havingpreviousknowledgeofstuttering,oratleastattendingacourseon the subject, was also an asset. These students who attended suchacourseobtainedthehighestscoresonthegeneraltolerancemeasure.ThesestudentsalsoscoredhigherthanthePolishcontrolsontheother


measures.Thereweresomeinterestingfindings inthestutteringandADHDgroups.Apartfromtheaccuracyofknowledge,thestutteringgroupdidnotperformsignificantlybetterthanthecontrolgroup(thiswasforthePolishsample).Thereweresignificantdifferencesbetweenthestut-teringandADHDgroupsaswellasbetweenPolishandEnglishADHDandstutteringgroups.

Therefore,thefollowingcanbeconcluded:takingacourseinstutteringimprovesattitudestowardsstutteringaswellasaperceivedknowledgeofthedisorderandtoleranceingeneral.Whatismore,Englishstudentsdisplaymorepositiveattitudestowardsstutteringandhaveamoreac-curateknowledgeaboutitthanPolishstudents,buttheyscoreloweronperceivedknowledgeanddisplayaworsegeneraltolerance.Readingatextaboutstutteringimprovesoverallattitudestowardsthedisorderaswellasaccuracyofknowledge(inthesetwovariablesthehighestscoreswereobtainedbythestudentswhoreadsuchatext).Polishstudentsattributetothemselvesthehighestlevelsofknowledgeaboutstuttering.Malesandfe-malesdonotdifferintheirattitudestowardsstuttering.Knowingsomeonewhostuttersisconnectedwithhigherscoresonattitude,generaltoleranceandperceivedknowledge.

TheresultsobtainedinthisstudywereconsistentwithresearchdonebySt.Louis34whofoundnosignificantdifferencesbetweenmalesver-susfemalesfrom50differentsamplesintheirattitudestowardsstutter-ing.AlthoughnotprovidingapreversuspostPOSHA-Scomparison,ourfindingssupportthepossibilitythatattitudestowardsstutteringcanbeimproved.35

Thereareafewlimitationsinthestudydescribedabove.Tostartwith,thereisanissuewiththesamplesizeinthisresearch.Althoughitislargeoverall,theamountofparticipantsineachseparatesubgroupisquitesmall(forexample,therewereabout20participantsintheADHDknowl-edgegroup).Suchsmallsamplesizeisdifficulttodrawvalidconclusionsfrom.Ifsuchastudyisreplicatedinthefutureitwillbeadvisabletoin-troducealargersamplesize.

Anotherissuewasthefactthatitwasfemale-dominated–therewereveryfewmalerespondentsineachsubgroup.Thisislikelytobeduetothecoursesattendedbymostoftherespondentswhoagreedtotakepart(Psy-chologyandPedagogyaregenerallyfemale-dominatedcoursesofstudy).Becauseofthisitcouldbearguedthattheconclusionsaboutgenderdif-ferencesinthisresearcharenotvalid.But,ontheotherhand,St.Louis

34 K.O.St. Louis:“Maleversusfemaleattitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of Communication Disorders,2012,vol.45,pp.246–253.

35 T.W. Flynn, K.O. St. Louis: “Changingadolescentattitudestowardstut-tering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2011,vol.36,pp.110–121.


arrivedatsimilarconclusions,sothismaynotnecessarilybeasignificantissue.36Thisfactoraboutthegenderofthemajorityoftherespondentsdoes,however,influencethegeneralizabilityoftheresults.

ThethreegroupsintheEnglishsampledidnotactuallyconsistsolelyofBritishstudents.Someoftheparticipantswhotookpartwereinternation-alstudents.Thesestudentscamefromallcontinentsandfromcountrieswithdifferentculturesandbeliefsystems.ItcannotthereforebesaidthattheresearchcomparedEnglishandPolishstudentswithoutitbeingneces-sarytodeletealargeportionofthedata,whichinturnwouldbeagreatdisadvantagetothepresentstudy.Animprovementnecessarytoconsiderinfutureresearchwouldbetomakesurethatonlynativestudentsareconsideredinsuchcross-culturalcomparisons.

POSHA-Sasksclosedquestions(theparticipantseithergive“yes”or“no”answersorrateonascalefrom1–5or−2to+2).Theissuewiththissortofquestionsisthattheyleavenoroomforelaboratingontheresponse–thereisnowaytounderstandwhytherespondentschosecertainanswersorhowtheyreallyfelt.

Future directions

Preventionisthemosteffectivewayofdealingwithstuttering.Researchastheonedescribedaboveshowsthatthereisstillalotofworktobedoneineducatingthepublicaboutstuttering,itscauses,warningsigns,riskfactorsandtreatments.Alothasalreadybeendone,especiallyinthe United Kingdom and the United States where support groupsand organizations providing help and services to people who stutteraremucheasiertoreach.Bycontrast,inPolandtheprofessionalsinthechild’severydayenvironmentareunawareofwhatstuttering is,andtherefore,arelesslikelytodirectthechildtoaspeechtherapist.Thisinturnmeansthathis/herproblemworsensandismuchmoredifficulttoovercomewhenthechildfinallyattendstherapy.PublicationswhichhavebeenwidelyavailableintheStatesviatheStutteringFoundationofAmericaincludethoseentitled“Thechildwhostutters:tothepaediatri-cian”and“Stuttering:straighttalkforteachers”haveonlyrecentlybeentranslatedintoPolish.Educationalposterswerealsocreatedandplacedinkindergartens,schools,clinicsandprivatepracticeswithhelpfulguide-linesforparentsandteachersofchildrenwhostutter.Theseeffortsshouldbecontinued.

36 K.O. St. Louis: “The Public Opinion Survey of Human Attributes-Stut-tering(POSHA-S)…”


Acknowledgements

The POSHA-S was used with the permission of Kenneth O. St. Louis.ThePolishtranslationwascarriedoutbyAnetaPrzepiórkaandAgataBłachnio.

TheauthorswouldalsoliketothankProfessorIwonaLoewe,ProfessorDanutaPluta-Wojciechowska,KatarzynaWęsierska,PhDandAgnieszkaStasiczek,MAfromtheUniversityofSilesiafortheirhelpwithdatacol-lectioninthePolishsampleandProfessorElizabethWonnacottfromtheUniversityofWarwickwhosupervisedtheproject.

ThisresearchwaspresentedattheInternationalCounsellingandEduca-tionConferenceinIstanbul,Turkey,May2–5,2013.

References

AbdallaF.A.,St. LouisK.O.: “Arabschoolteachers’knowledge,beliefsandreactionsregardingstuttering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2012,vol.37,pp.54–69.

BetzI.R.,BloodG.W.,BloodI.M.:“Universitystudents’perceptionsofpre-schoolandkindergartenchildrenwhostutter.”Journal of Commu-nication Disorders,2007,vol.41,pp.259–273.

BloodsteinO.:“Onpluttering,skiveringandfloggering:acommentary.”Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders,1990,vol.55,pp.392–393.

Burley P.M., Rinaldi W.: “Effectsofsexoflistenerandofstuttereronratingsofstutteringspeakers.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1986,vol.17,pp.329–333.

CraigA.:“Theassociationbetweenqualityoflifeandstuttering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2010,vol.35,pp.159–160.

CraigA., TranY., Craig M.: “Stereotypestowardsstutteringforthosewhohaveneverhaddirectcontactwithpeoplewhostutter:Arand-omizedandstratifiedstudy.”Perceptual and Motor Skills,2003,vol.97,pp.235–245.

Crowe T.A., Cooper E.B.: “Parentalattitudestowardandknowledgeofstuttering.”Journal of Communication Disorders,1977,vol.10,pp.343–357.

CroweT.A.,WaltonJ.H.:“Teacherattitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1981,vol.6,pp.163–174.

FlynnT.W.,St. LouisK.O.:“Changingadolescentattitudestowardstut-tering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2011,vol.36,pp.110–121.

FlynnT.W.,St. LouisK.O.:An investigation of adolescent opinions on stut-tering.PosterpresentedatAnnualConventionoftheAmericanSpeech–Language–HearingAssociation,Boston,MA,2007.


Guitar B.: Stuttering:An integrated approach to its nature and treatment.Baltimore:LippincottWilliams&Wilkins,2006.

Hughes S.: Exploring attitudes toward people who stutter: A mixed model approach.Unpublisheddissertation.BowlingGreen,OH:BowlingGreenStateUniversity,2008.

HughesS.etal.:“Universitystudents’explanationsfortheirdescriptionsofpeoplewhostutter:Anexploratorymixedmodelstudy.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2010,vol.35,pp.280–298.

HurstM.A.,CooperE.B.:“Employerattitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1983,vol.8,pp.1–12.

Ip M.L. etal.:“StutteringattitudesinHongKongandadjacentMain-landChina.”Journal of Speech-LanguagePathology,2012,vol.14,pp.543–556.

McGee L., Kalinowski J., Stuart A.: “Effectofavideotapedocumen-taryonhighschoolstudents’perceptionsofahighschoolmalewhostutterers.”Journal of Speech–Language Pathology and Audiology,1996,vol.20,pp. 240–246.

OzdemirR.S.,St. LouisK.O.,TopbasS.: “StutteringattitudesamongTurkishfamilygenerationsandneighborsfromrepresentativesam-ples.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2011,vol.36,pp.318–333.

Pachigar V., Stansf ield J., Goldbart J.: “Beliefsandattitudesofpri-maryschoolteachers inMumbai, Indiatowardschildrenwhostut-ter.”International Journal of Disability, Development and Education,2011,vol.58,pp.287–302.

Pa t t e r s o n J., P r i n g T.: “Listener attitudes to stuttering speakers:Noevidenceforagenderdifference.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1991,vol.16,pp.201–205.

Snyder G.J.: “Exploratoryresearchinthemeasurementandmodifica-tionofattitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2001,vol.26,pp.149–160.

St. Louis K.O.: “Aglobalprojecttomeasurepublicattitudesaboutstut-tering.”The ASHA Leader,2005.

St. LouisK.O.:“Maleversusfemaleattitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of Communication Disorders, 2012, vol.45,pp.246–253.

St. Louis K.O.: “ThePublicOpinionSurveyofHumanAttributes-Stut-tering(POSHA-S):Summaryframeworkandempiricalcomparisons.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2011,vol.36,pp.256–261.

St. Louis K.O.: “Researchanddevelopmentforapublicattitudeinstru-mentforstuttering.”Journal of Communication Disorders,2012,vol.45,pp.129–146.

St. LouisK.O.,LassN.J.:“Asurveyofcommunicativedisordersstudents’attitudestowardstuttering.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1981,vol.6,pp. 49–80.


St. Louis K.O., Roberts P.M.: “Measuringattitudestowardstuttering:English-to-FrenchtranslationsinCanadaandCameroon.”Journal of Communication Disorders,2010,vol.43,pp.361–377.

St. LouisK.O.etal.:“Developmentofaprototypequestionnairetosurveypublicattitudestowardstuttering:Constructvalidity.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,2009,vol.34,pp.11–28.

S t. L o u i s K .O. et al.: “Development of a prototype questionnaire tosurvey public attitudes toward stuttering: Principles and methodo-logies in the first prototype.” The Internet Journal of Epidemiology,vol.5(2),2008.

St. Louis K.O. etal.:“Developmentofaprototypequestionnairetosur-veypublicattitudestowardstuttering:Reliabilityofthesecondproto-type.”Contemporary Issues in Communication Sciences and Disorders,2009,vol.36,pp.101–107.

WardD.:Stuttering and Cluttering. Frameworks for understanding and treat-ment.Hove:PsychologyPress,2006.

Weisel A., Spektor G.: “Apossibleexplanationofthe‘stutterer’stere-otype.”Journal of Fluency Disorders,1998,vol.23,pp.157–172.


Appendix1

MeanvaluesandratingsofthedemographiccharacteristicsofsevensamplesofuniversitystudentsandthemediansamplemeanvaluefromthePOSHA-Sdatabase(anitemusedasavariableinthisstudyisshowninthefootnotetothetable)

Demographiccharacteristics

Poland UK

POSH

A-S

Data

base

m

edia

n*

Spee

chTh

erap

y

mod

ule

Stutt

erin

g

info

rmat

ion

ADH

D

info

rmat

ion

Cont

rol

Stutt

erin

g

info

rmat

ion

ADH

D

info

rmat

ion

Cont

rol

AgeGender(male:female)Education(years)Income(familyandfriends)(scaleof1–5)Income(country)(scaleof1–5)Working(%)

23.800.0916.983.05

2.9714

20.140.2112.913.33

3.033

21.980.7913.403.05

2.9520

20.020.1913.593.25

3.065

21.320.4513.733.19

3.330

21.170.3812.502.95

3.330

20.940.2213.003.15

3.396

35.740.5314.663.15

3.0062

Self-identification(%)MultilingualIntelligentLeft-handedObeseMentallyillStuttering

86348400

100449300

924440120

1005910500

405010370

204025500

384862122

39407710

HealthandabilitiesPhysicalhealthMentalhealthAbilitytolearnAbilitytospeak**

46455468

48553656

52565872

47434162

32435252

35506058

40416368

45576062

LifeprioritiesBesafe/secureBefreeSpendtimealoneAttendsocialeventsImaginenewthingsHelplessfortunateHaveexcitingexperiencesPracticemyreligionEarnmoneyDojob/dutyGetthingsdoneSolvebigproblems

907232193647–193357717781

79712835503813–1758567477

788324506452–8466749088

83782635472913–1168516669

726328231228–20–4142506047

70632882418–25–6015505863

767444352832–10–5044446653

806432153352–182558747469

* Medianof195separatesamplemeansfromthePOSHA-Sdatabasecontaining8,874respondents(circaSeptember,2013).

**Unconvertedratingsusedinthevariable,“Ratingofownspeakingability”usedinthisstudy.


Appendix2

MeanratingsforPOSHA-Sitems,components,subscores,andOverallStutteringScores(−100to+100)forthemeanratingsofsevensamplesofuniversitystudentsandthemediansamplemeanvaluefromthePOSHA-Sdatabase(itemsusedasvariablesinthisstudyareshownbyfootnotes)

Variablesanalysedinthepresentstudy

Poland UK

POSH

A-S

data

base

med

iana

Spee

chTh

erap

ym

odul

e

Stutt

erin

gin

form

atio

n

ADH

Din

form

atio

n

Cont

rol

Stutt

erin

gin

form

atio

n

ADH

Din

form

atio

n

Cont

rol

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Belie

fsa

bout

per

sons

who

stutt

er

Traits/personality havethemselvestoblame*b nervousorexcitable*b shyorfearful*b

3510048−44

419771–44

239620–48

23 8432–47

711005757

45953010

309614–20

18846–8

Stutteringshouldbehelpedby… speechandlanguagetherapistb otherpeoplewhostutterb medicaldoctor*b

3710073–61

191009–53

98838–100

179432–73

4210033–7

4810050–5

3510033–27

198910–26

Stutteringiscausedby… geneticinheritancec learningorhabits*c averyfrighteningevent*c anactofGod*c avirusordisease*c ghosts,demons,spirits*c

39 1025–54 856798

462444–38856297

262032–64672480

27 1714–51732186

58301047909083

4620020906085

4644–10810035100

341515–4654987

Potential canmakefriendsb canleadnormallivesb candoanyjobtheywantb shouldhavejobsrequiringgood judgmentb

711001005034

5894941529

681001003636

60971001925

6793874047

66100805530

671001003533

6293854937

Total 45 41 31 32 60 51 45 34

Self

reac

tions

top

eopl

ew

host

utter

Accommodating/helping trytoactlikethepersonwas talkingnormallyb personlikeme fillintheperson’swords*b tellthepersonto“slowdown” or“relax”*b makejokeaboutstuttering*b shouldtrytohidetheirstuttering*b

7490

69926

9496

45100

–4153–3

8874

3192

–4220–40

8868

3476

–1637–27

7659

5377

–404070

10073

4380

–302535

8070

5696

–355155

9078

4778

–224721

8870


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Se

lfre

actio

nsto

peo

ple

who

stutt

erSocialdistance/sympathy feelcomfortableorrelaxedb feelpity*b feelimpatient(notwanttowait whilethepersonstutters)*b concernaboutmydoctor*b concernaboutmyneighbour*b concernaboutmybrotherorsister*b concernaboutme*b impressionofpersonwhostutterse wanttohavestuttering

1741871

61900–59 21–58

1503559

5397–9–479–66

1–40–824

5610012–726–70

–3 –27 1727

1194–19–697–78

1570–1050

5010047–43–10–68

29354060

859055–10–5–58

1855039

659039–26–5–69

4212059

3969–26–502–70

Knowledge/experience amountknownaboutstutteringf stutterersknownd personalexperience(me,myfamily, friends)

–2828–91–20

–30–14–8912

–31–16–8912

–41–13–92–17

–56–52–84–33

–56–53–80–35

–56–50–90–29

–36–23–86–3

Knowledgesource television,radio,films magazines,newspapers,books internet school doctors,nurses,otherspecialists

3410454277–4

214767112–32

–1228–1236–42–68

20 52214310–24

–1143–233–20–57

–11550–10–20–80

–1845–29–16–24–65

–16–5–10–33–18–32

Total 24 12 –3 3 0 1 0 0

Obe

sity

/men

tali

llnes

ssu

bsco

re

Overallimpression obesee mentallyille

–4–13–21

–11–6–15

–11–8–14

–14 –8–25

–31–13–10

–210–5

–26–11–5

–15–23–9

Want/have obese mentallyill

–79–78–80

–87–87–88

–84–88–80

–92 –92 –91

–88–92 –85

–90–95–85

–89–97–82

–84–83–85

Amountknownabout obese mentallyill

117–15

–86–22

07–6

–411–18

11–325

–6–130

21437

01011

Total –27 –35 –32 –37 –36 –39 –32 –34OverallStutteringScore 35 27 14 17 30 26 22 16

*Indicatesthatratingsarereversedsomorepositive,accurate,ordesirableratingsarehigher

a Medianof195separatesamplemeansfromthePOSHA-Sdatabasecontaining8,874respondents(circaSeptember,2013).

bUnconvertedratingsusedinthevariable“Attitudes”usedinthisstudy.

cUnconvertedratingsusedinthevariable“Accuracyofknowledge”usedinthisstudy.

dUnconvertedandunweightedratingsusedinthevariable“Knowingapersonwhostutters”usedinthisstudy.

eUnconvertedratingsusedinthevariable“Generaltolerance”usedinthisstudy.

fUnconvertedratingsusedinthevariable“Perceivedamountofknowledgeofstuttering”usedinthisstudy.


Marta Węsierska, Kenneth O. St. Louis

Porównanie postaw polskich i angielskich studentów wobec jąkania się

Streszczenie:Badaniapokazują,żeuogółuspołeczeństwa–czytowrzeczywi-stości,czytylkohipotetycznie–utrzymujesiępiętnującapostawawobecosób,któresięjąkają.Wewcześniejszychbadaniachokreślano,jakiesąpostawywobecjąkaniawśródróżnychgruprespondentów:studentów,rodzicówczylogopedów.Niniejszyartykułopisujebadania,któremiałynaceluustalenieróżnicpomiędzypostawamiwobecjąkaniawśródstudentówwPolsceiWielkiejBrytanii.

Wszyscy uczestnicy zostali poproszeni o jednorazowe wypełnienie kwestio-nariusza POSHA-S (Public Opinion Survey of Human Attributes-Stuttering).Kwestionariuszbadałsześćobszarówzwiązanychzpostawamiorazwiedządo-tyczącązaburzenia, jakimjest jąkanie:postawywobec jąkania,poziomwiedzyojąkaniu,znajomośćzosobą(bądźosobami)jąkającąsię,własnaocenaumiejęt-nościwypowiadaniasię,opiniauczestnikanatematogólnegospołecznegopozio-mutolerancjiwobecjąkaniaorazpoziomuwiedzyotymzaburzeniu.

Wyniki otrzymane w polskiej grupie badawczej wskazują, że udział w zaję-ciach związanych tematycznie z jąkaniem prowadzi do poprawy nastawieniawobec jąkania, jak i zwiększenia wiedzy o tym zaburzeniu oraz podniesieniaogólnegopoziomutolerancji.Wynikiporównawczeobugrup–polskiejibrytyj-skiej–wskazały,żeangielscystudencimanifestująbardziejpozytywnepostawywobecjąkaniaorazposiadająwiększąwiedzęnatemattegozaburzenia.Zkoleipolscy studenci wyżej oceniali swoją znajomość zaburzenia oraz otrzymywaliwyższewynikiwzakresieogólnejtolerancji.Wobukrajachprzeczytanieteks-tunatematjąkaniaprzedwypełnieniemkwestionariuszapozytywniewpłynęłonapostawywobeczaburzenia.Znajomośćzosobąjąkającąsięokazałasięwspół-zależnazwyższymiwynikamiwzakresiepostaw,ogólnejtolerancjiorazocenywłasnejwiedzyo jąkaniu.Zpowyższychwynikówbadaczewywnioskowali,żepostawywobecjąkaniamogąbyćzmienioneprzezkontaktzosobąjąkającąsię–zarównoosobisty,jakizapośrednictwemnagraniawideo.Badaniewykazałopo-trzebędalszej,bardziejdogłębnejanalizypostawwobecróżnychludzkichcech,takichjakjąkanie.Upowszechnianiewynikówbadańwzakresiepostawwobecjąkaniajestważnymelementemwprocesiepodnoszeniaświadomościnatemattegozaburzeniawspołeczeństwie.

Słowa kluczowe:postawywobecjąkaniasię,kwestionariusz,POSHA-S,studen-ci,Polska,Anglia

Marta Węsierska, Kenneth O. St. Louis

Der Vergleich von der Einstellung der polnischen und englischen Studenten zum Stottern

Zusammenfassung: Wie die Forschungen zeigen, werden stotternde PersonenimmernochinWirklichkeitodernurhypothetischvomGroßteilderGesellschaftanprangert.InfrüherenForschungenwurdeuntersucht,welcheEinstellungzumStotternverschiedeneGruppenderBefragten:Studenten,ElternoderLogopäden


hatten.DervorliegendeArtikelschildertdieunterdenStudenteninPolenundGroßbritanniendurchgeführtenForschungen,diebezweckten,dieUnterschiedeinderEinstellungzumStotternzwischenpolnischenundenglischenStudentenfestzustellen.AlleBefragtenwurdengebeten,einmaldenPOSHA-S(PublicOpi-nionSurveyofHumanAttributes-Stuttering)Fragebogenauszufüllen.MitdemFragebogen wurden sechs mit dem Stottern und der Einstellung dazu verbun-denenGebieteuntersucht:EinstellungzumStottern,KenntnisseüberStottern,Bekanntschaftmiteiner(odermehreren)stotterndenPersonen,eigeneBeurtei-lungderAussagefähigkeit,dieMeinungenderBefragtenüberdenallgemeinenStanddergesellschaftlichenToleranzdemStotterngegenüberundheutigesWis-sensstandüberdieseStörung.

DieinderpolnischenForschungsgruppeerreichtenErgebnisseweisendaraufhin,dassdieTeilnahmeandenvomStotternhandelndenLehrveranstaltungeneine bessere Einstellung zum Stottern, bessere Kenntnisse über diese Störungund letztendlich mehr Toleranz zu Folge hatte. Die Ergebnisse des VergleichsvondenbeidenGruppenderpolnischenundderenglischen–zeigten,dasseng-lischeStudentensichdurchpositivereEinstellungzumStotternunddurchbes-sereKenntnisseüberdasProblemauszeichneten.PolnischeStudentendagegenbeurteilten ihre Kenntnisse über Stottern höher und waren mehr tolerant. Ei-nengutenEinflussaufpositivereEinstellungzuderStörunghattedieLektüredesvomStotternhandelndenTextesnochvordemAusfüllendesFragebogens.Die Bekanntschaft mit einem Stotternden wirkte sich positiv auf die Einstel-lung, allgemeine Toleranz und die Beurteilung von eigenen Kenntnissen überStottern aus. Die Forschungsergebnisse erlaubten den Wissenschaftlern zumSchlusskommen,dasseinpersönlicheroderVideo-KontaktmitstotternderPer-sonimStandesind,dieEinstellungzumStotternzuändern.SiebetonenauchdieNotwendigkeiteinertieferenAnalysevonderEinstellungzuverschiedenenmenschlichenUnvollkommenheiten,wiez.B.:Stottern.DieVerbreitungvonIn-formationenüberdieEinstellungzumStotternwirdbestimmtzurErweiterungderKenntnisseüberdieseStörunginderGesellschaftbeitragen.

Schlüsselwörter: Einstellung zum Stottern, Fragebogen, POSHA-S, Studenten,Polen,England

Documents

Marta Węsierska, Kenneth O. St. Louis - bazhum.muzhp.plbazhum.muzhp.pl/media/files/Chowanna/Chowanna-r2014-t1/Chowann… · Marta Węsierska, Kenneth O. St. Louis ... 2 B. Guitar: