Public attitudes toward stuttering in Europe: Within-country and between-country comparisons.

INTRODUCTION: Epidemiological research methods have been shown to be useful in determining factors that might predict commonly reported negative public attitudes toward stuttering. Previous research has suggested that stuttering attitudes of respondents from North America and Europe (i.e., "The West"), though characterized by stereotypes and potential stigma, are more positive than those from several other regions of the world. This inference assumes that public attitudes within various regions characterized by "The West" are similar. PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine the extent to which public stuttering attitudes are similar or different both within regions of three different European countries and between or among five different European countries or similar geographic areas. It also aimed to compare these European attitudes to attitudes from 135 samples around the world using a standard measure. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Using convenience sampling, 1111 adult respondents from eight different investigations completed the Public Opinion Survey of Human Attributes-Stuttering (POSHA-S) in the dominant language of each country or area. In Study I, the authors compared attitudes within three different regions of Bosnia & Herzegovina, Italy, and Norway. In Study II, the authors compared attitudes between combined samples from Bosnia & Herzegovina, Italy, and Norway (with additional respondents from Sweden), and two other samples, one from Germany and the other from Ireland and England. RESULTS: Attitudes of adults from the three samples within Bosnia & Herzegovina, Italy, and Norway were remarkably similar. By contrast, attitudes between the five different countries or area were quite dramatically different. Demographic variables on the POSHA-S did not predict the rank order of these between-country/area differences. Compared to the POSHA-S worldwide database, European attitudes ranged from less positive than average (i.e., Italians) to more positive than average (i.e., Norwegians and Swedes). CONCLUSION: Factors related to national identity appear to play a significant role in differences in public attitudes in Europe and should be explored in future research.

Public attitudes toward-and identification of-cluttering and stuttering in Norway and Puerto Rico.

PURPOSE: The study sought to compare public attitudes toward cluttering versus stuttering in Norway and Puerto Rico and to compare respondents' identification of persons known with these fluency disorders. METHOD: After reading lay definitions of cluttering and stuttering, three samples of adults from Norway and three from Puerto Rico rated their attitudes toward cluttering and/or stuttering on modified versions of the POSHA-Cl (for cluttering) and POSHA-S (for stuttering). They also identified children and adults whom they knew who either or both manifested cluttering or stuttering. RESULTS: Attitudes toward cluttering were essentially unaffected by rating either cluttering only or combined cluttering and stuttering on the same questionnaire in both countries. The same was also true of stuttering. Attitudes were very similar toward both disorders although slightly less positive for cluttering. Norwegian attitudes toward both disorders were generally more positive than Puerto Rican attitudes. The average respondent identified slightly more than one fluency disorder, a higher percentage for stuttering than cluttering and higher for adults than children. Cluttering-stuttering was rarely identified. CONCLUSION: Given a lay definition, this study confirmed that adults from diverse cultures hold attitudes toward cluttering that are similar to-but somewhat less positive than-their attitudes toward stuttering. It also confirmed that adults can identify cluttering among people they know, although less commonly than stuttering. Design controls in this study assured that consideration of stuttering did not affect either the attitudes or identification results for cluttering. EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES: The reader will be able to: (a) describe the effects-or lack thereof-of considerations of stuttering on attitudes toward cluttering; (b) describe differences in public identification of children and adults who either clutter or stutter; (c) describe differences between attitudes toward cluttering and stuttering in Norway and Puerto Rico.