[ Contents | Search | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Klaas Bakker, MSU, Springfield MO.
Date: 15 Apr 2010
Time: 23:10:43 -0500
Remote Name: 188.8.131.52
Like David hinted at, I see room for both models to exist along each other if a distinction is made in cluttering as a symptom, or a behavioral pattern, on the one hand, and a diagnostic classification on the other. All of us once in a while stutter without deserving to be diagnosed with a stuttering problem. Likewise, we may demonstrate the behavioral features of cluttering occasionally. Certain diagnostic groups (e.g., ADHD, particular forms of traumatic head injuries, and others) may more likely than others demonstrate the behavioral characteristics of cluttering and still not deserve to be classified as a PWC (person who clutters). All I described so far would be consistent with the cluttering spectrum interpretation. There would still be room for one more group who clutters so frequently, or severely, that the speakers who belong to this group deserve a diagnostic classification for it. The classification than would need criteria that for example could be consistent with the LCD concept. Logically we have to also consider another possibility and that is that people who are cluttering so severely so as to deserve a diagnostic label for it may also differ in other ways not captured by the LCD definition (e.g., have distinctly different hereditary characteristics, or have brain centers that are functionally different). In short I am suggesting that though a wide range of individuals may at times speak in a cluttered manner, only certain individuals deserve to be characterized by cluttering as a diagnostic classification because in their case some clinical threshold was exceeded. Whether either model, both models, or neither of the models deserve to be considered true ultimately will have to be determined through empirical research.