Attention Bias in School-Age Children Who Stutter: Evidence From a Dot-Probe Task.

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	Attention Bias in School-Age Children Who Stutter: Evidence From a Dot-Probe Task.
Authors:	Eichorn, Naomi¹ neichorn@memphis.edu, Campanelli, Luca²
Source:	Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research. Jul2025, Vol. 68 Issue 7, p3155-3170. 16p.
Subject Terms:	Children with disabilities, Stuttering, Anxiety, School children, Comparative studies, Speech therapy, Attentional bias, Statistical power analysis, Research funding, Task performance, T-test (Statistics), Descriptive statistics, Regression analysis
Abstract:	Purpose: Cognitive models of anxiety attribute anxiety and ruminative thought patterns to selective processing of threat-related stimuli that automatically capture attention. We explored whether stuttering was associated with similar attentional biases by examining: (a) whether school-age children who stutter (CWS) differed from controls in selective processing of threat-related and neutral stimuli and (b) whether attentional biases in CWS were specific to threat stimuli that reflected stuttering-related experience. Method: Participants included 39 children (19 CWS), ages 8 to 15 years. Children completed a dot-probe task in which they responded as quickly as possible to on-screen probes that replaced threat-related or neutral words. Three types of threat words were presented: (a) general threat words; (b) words related to stuttering; and (c) personalized words on which participants anticipated stuttering. Attention bias (AB) was computed based on reaction times for congruent conditions (probe replaced threat stimuli) relative to incongruent conditions (probe replaced neutral stimuli) and compared across groups and stimulus types. Results: Strong evidence for an AB effect was observed for CWS but not for controls, as demonstrated by faster responses to congruent relative to incongruent trials. Within the stuttering group, AB effects were driven primarily by stuttering-related and personal words but not general threat words. Conclusions: Findings indicate that CWS preferentially allocate attention toward stimuli relevant to stuttering experiences. Further research is needed to clarify how such selective processing may contribute to the development of stutteringrelated concerns, psycho-emotional reactions to stuttering, and associated behaviors, such as avoidance of sounds, words, or speaking situations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
	Copyright of Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research is the property of American Speech-Language-Hearing Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database:	Education Research Complete

Description
Abstract:	Purpose: Cognitive models of anxiety attribute anxiety and ruminative thought patterns to selective processing of threat-related stimuli that automatically capture attention. We explored whether stuttering was associated with similar attentional biases by examining: (a) whether school-age children who stutter (CWS) differed from controls in selective processing of threat-related and neutral stimuli and (b) whether attentional biases in CWS were specific to threat stimuli that reflected stuttering-related experience. Method: Participants included 39 children (19 CWS), ages 8 to 15 years. Children completed a dot-probe task in which they responded as quickly as possible to on-screen probes that replaced threat-related or neutral words. Three types of threat words were presented: (a) general threat words; (b) words related to stuttering; and (c) personalized words on which participants anticipated stuttering. Attention bias (AB) was computed based on reaction times for congruent conditions (probe replaced threat stimuli) relative to incongruent conditions (probe replaced neutral stimuli) and compared across groups and stimulus types. Results: Strong evidence for an AB effect was observed for CWS but not for controls, as demonstrated by faster responses to congruent relative to incongruent trials. Within the stuttering group, AB effects were driven primarily by stuttering-related and personal words but not general threat words. Conclusions: Findings indicate that CWS preferentially allocate attention toward stimuli relevant to stuttering experiences. Further research is needed to clarify how such selective processing may contribute to the development of stutteringrelated concerns, psycho-emotional reactions to stuttering, and associated behaviors, such as avoidance of sounds, words, or speaking situations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:	10924388
DOI:	10.1044/2025_JSLHR-24-00686