Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Tokyo.
Research Institute, National Rehabilitation Center for Persons with Disabilities, Tokorozawa, Japan.
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2020 Mar 23;63(3):688-701. doi: 10.1044/2019_JSLHR-19-00393. Epub 2020 Mar 18.
Purpose Working memory (WM) deficits are implicated in various communication disorders, including stuttering. The reading span test (RST) measures WM capacity with the dual task of reading sentences aloud and remembering target words. This study demonstrates a difference in strategy between people who stutter (PWS) and people who do not stutter (PWNS) in performing the RST. The impact of the effective strategy and the stuttering-like disfluencies during the RST were investigated. Method Twenty-six PWS and 24 people who do not stutter performed the RST and a simple reading aloud task. After the RST, they were asked which strategy ("imagery" or "rehearsal") they had used in order to remember the target words during the task. Results The proportion of those who used an "imagery" strategy during the RST was significantly smaller in the PWS group. However, the RST scores of those who used an "imagery" strategy were significantly higher than the RST scores of those who used a "rehearsal" strategy in both groups. The "rehearsal" users were asked to undertake one more RST with an "imagery" strategy, which resulted in an increased score for both groups. The disfluency frequency of the PWS group was significantly reduced during the RST than during the oral reading task, irrespective of the employed strategy. Conclusions PWS tended to use the less effective verbal "rehearsal" strategy during the RST. The differential effects of switching strategies on the measured WM capacity and on the disfluency rate suggest that the enhanced fluency during the RST would be mostly attributable to the reduced attention to speech motor control. Therefore, the use of the "imagery" strategy and focusing on the contents of communication, away from speech motor control, should help PWS communicate better in daily conversation.
目的 工作记忆 (WM) 缺陷与各种交流障碍有关，包括口吃。阅读跨度测试 (RST) 通过大声朗读句子和记住目标单词的双重任务来衡量 WM 能力。本研究展示了口吃者 (PWS) 和不口吃者 (PWNS) 在执行 RST 时策略的差异。研究了有效策略和 RST 期间口吃样不流畅对结果的影响。
方法 26 名口吃者和 24 名不口吃者完成了 RST 和简单的朗读任务。在完成 RST 后，他们被要求在任务期间记住目标单词时使用哪种策略（“想象”或“复述”）。
结果 在 RST 期间使用“想象”策略的比例在 PWS 组中明显较小。然而，在两组中，使用“想象”策略的 RST 分数明显高于使用“复述”策略的 RST 分数。要求“复述”使用者再进行一次 RST 测试，使用“想象”策略，这导致两组的分数都增加了。无论使用哪种策略，PWS 组在 RST 期间的不流畅频率都明显低于朗读任务期间的不流畅频率。
结论 在 RST 期间，PWS 倾向于使用效果较差的口头“复述”策略。切换策略对测量 WM 能力和不流畅率的不同影响表明，在 RST 期间流畅度的提高主要归因于对口吃者言语运动控制的关注度降低。因此，使用“想象”策略并关注交流内容，而不是言语运动控制，应该有助于 PWS 在日常对话中更好地交流。
