The Researcher Is In

[ Contents | Search | Next | Previous | Up ]


Re: Thank you for your response

From: Vasu Parameswaran
Date: 20 Oct 2004
Time: 07:55:07 -0500
Remote Name: 141.156.169.59

Comments

Hi Rick, Thanks for your comment. I agree there have been no earth shattering discoveries in stuttering that merit a comparison to Newton's laws but my point was that "old" does not necessarily imply "wrong". About Sheehan/Johnson, my point was not simply that they were giants but that there were many sound ideas that were proposed by them that do not appear much these days in therapy programs. Where do you see any talk about role-conflict and approach avoidance? Where do you see talk about voluntary stuttering with a clear rationale for using it? On the other hand, we constantly hear the word "technique" and I have not yet seen a convincing theory or basis for the use of any "technique". In my opinion, the use of a technique to get rid of a disfluency is the most unimaginative way to think about a disfluency. The rationale appears to be "it does not sound good, so let us make it sound good!".


Last changed: 09/12/05