Frequência e tipologia das disfluências: análise comparativa entre taquifêmicos e gagos

PURPOSE: to quantify and to compare the typology of disfluencies in the speech of adults who clutter and adults with developmental persistent stuttering. METHOD: participants of this investigation were 15 adults, divided in two groups: Group of Adults Who Clutter, composed by 5 individuals and Group...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Souza, Jaqueline Bergamo De, Paschoalino, Francine Custódio [UNESP], Cardoso, Vanessa Moraes [UNESP], Oliveira, Cristiane Moço Canhetti de [UNESP]
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2013
País:Brasil
Institución:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
Repositorio:Repositório Institucional da UNESP
Idioma:portugués
OAI Identifier:oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/109781
Acceso en línea:http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1516-18462013000400014
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/109781
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Fonoaudiologia
Fala
Diagnóstico
Gagueira
Distúrbios da Fala
Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences
Speech
Diagnosis
Stuttering
Speech Disorders
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: to quantify and to compare the typology of disfluencies in the speech of adults who clutter and adults with developmental persistent stuttering. METHOD: participants of this investigation were 15 adults, divided in two groups: Group of Adults Who Clutter, composed by 5 individuals and Group of Adults Who Stutter, composed by 10 subjects. The procedures used were: Assessment of Fluency, Predictive Cluttering Inventory and Stuttering Severity Instrument. RESULTS: the data indicated that the groups differed regarding the occurrence of other disfluencies (p=0,021) and stuttering-like disfluencies (p<0,001). The analysis for the types of other disfluencies revealed that there was statistically significant difference for the interjections, revision and unfinished word. The Group of Adults Who Stutter showed statistically significant increase of all the types of stuttering-like disfluencies. CONCLUSION: the group of adults who clutter showed increase of the occurrence of the other disfluencies, whereas the group of adults who stutter showed increase in the occurrence of the stuttering-like disfluencies. The other disfluencies were variable in both groups and those who clutter show less types of stuttering-like disfluencies when compared to those who stutter.