Scores on Riley's stuttering severity instrument versions three and four for samples of different length and for different types of speech material.

Riley stated that the minimum speech sample length necessary to compute his stuttering severity estimates was 200 syllables. This was investigated. Procedures supplied for the assessment of readers and non-readers were examined to see whether they give equivalent scores. Recordings of spontaneous speech samples from 23 young children (aged between 2 years 8 months and 6 years 3 months) and 31 older children (aged between 10 years 0 months and 14 years 7 months) were made. Riley's severity estimates were scored on extracts of different lengths. The older children provided spontaneous and read samples, which were scored for severity according to reader and non-reader procedures. Analysis of variance supported the use of 200-syllable-long samples as the minimum necessary for obtaining severity scores. There was no significant difference in SSI-3 scores for the older children when the reader and non-reader procedures were used. Samples that are 200-syllables long are the minimum that is appropriate for obtaining stable Riley's severity scores. The procedural variants provide similar severity scores.

Attention levels in young children who stutter.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether children who stutter (CWS) and children who do not stutter (CWNS) differ in terms of attentional ability. Participants were 40 age- and gender-matched CWS and CWNS (aged between 72 and 120 months). Attentional ability was assessed using the Test of Everyday Attention for Children (TEA-Ch), a clinical assessment battery comprising 13 attentional measures, assessing three areas of attention: selective attention, sustained attention, and attentional switching. A low score on the assessment indicates attentional difficulty. There was an overall tendency for CWS to score lower than CWNS on all 13 TEA-Ch measures and all three attentional abilities. This difference reached statistical significance for the sustained attentional component. The present study provides support for the hypothesis that there are some differences between CWS and CWNS in terms of attentional ability. The findings are interpreted within existing models of attention with regard to previous studies of attention in CWS.