Um, so, like, do speech disfluencies matter? A parametric evaluation of filler sounds and words.

This study evaluated how speech disfluencies affect perceived speaker effectiveness. Speeches with filler sounds and filler words at different rates of disfluencies (i.e., 0, 2, 5, and 12 per minute) were created and evaluated by a crowdsourcing service for survey-based research for the speaker's public speaking performance. Increased disfluencies, particularly filler sounds, significantly affected perceptions across most categories, notably at higher rates of filler sounds (i.e., 12 per minute). A low, but nonzero, rate of disfluencies (5 per minute) did not adversely affect perceived effectiveness. These findings suggest that although reducing filler sounds is crucial for optimizing perceived speaking effectiveness, a rate of five or fewer disfluencies per minute may be acceptable.

Awareness training reduces college students' speech disfluencies in public speaking.

Recent research suggests that a modified habit reversal procedure, including awareness training alone or combined with competing response training, is effective in decreasing speech disfluencies for college students. However, these procedures are potentially lengthy, sometimes require additional booster sessions, and could result in covariation of untargeted speaker behavior. We extended prior investigations by evaluating awareness training as a sole intervention while also measuring collateral effects of treatment on untargeted filler words and rate of speech. We found awareness training was effective for all participants without the use of booster sessions, and covariation between targeted filler words and secondary dependent variables was idiosyncratic across participants.