The working alliance in stuttering treatment: a neglected variable?

BACKGROUND: Multiple factors can influence the working alliance and treatment outcome in speech and language therapy. The 'working alliance' is an important concept in treatment and can be described as the degree to which a treatment dyad is engaged in collaborative, purposive work. To date, relatively little attention has been paid to this concept within speech and language treatment in general, and within stuttering treatment research in particular. AIMS: To investigate the role of the working alliance within stuttering treatment, and to evaluate whether the quality of the working alliance correlated with clients' concept of motivation and treatment outcomes 6 months post-therapy. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Eighteen adults (21-61 years) participated in this multiple single-case treatment study, with treatment facilitated by an experienced speech and language therapist. The working alliance was investigated using the Working Alliance Inventory-Short Version Revised (WAI-SR), an Extended version of the Client Preferences for Stuttering Treatment (CPST-E), the Overall Assessment of Speakers' Experience of Stuttering-Adult version (OASES-A), the Wright & Ayre Stuttering Self-Rating Profile (WASSP) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Analyses demonstrated significant associations between the working alliance and client motivation (r = 0.781) and treatment outcomes (r = 0.644) 6 months post-treatment. The association between client-led goals and therapy tasks appeared particularly important. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: The working alliance between speech and language therapists and persons who stutter matters. Within the alliance, the level of client-clinician agreement on treatment goals and therapy tasks may be of greater importance than the bond between client and clinician. Further research with greater numbers of participants is warranted.

Covert and overt stuttering: Concepts and comparative findings.

PURPOSE: One way of conceptualizing stuttering is on a continuum from primarily covert to primarily overt. Assertions have been made as to how those with covert stuttering might be impacted differently to those with overt stuttering, but findings from well-controlled studies remain scarce. The principal aim of the present study was to compare the impact of stuttering and emotional distress related to two subgroups of persons who stutter: people with primarily overt stuttering and people with primarily covert stuttering. In exploring this, we also offer some preliminary thoughts on challenges with the terminology surrounding the concepts of 'overtness' and 'covertness'. METHODS: Twenty-one adults already enrolled in a multiple, single-case treatment study (Sønsterud et al., 2019, 2020) took part in the present study, and underwent a battery of tests that assessed anxiety, depression, fear of negative evaluation, and quality of life. The sub-groups were identified on the basis of self-categorization using the Tomaiuoli, Del Gado, Spinetti, Capparelli, and Venuti (2015) classification, as well as the evaluation of speech samples from two independent SLPs (Sønsterud et al., 2020). The classifications were further explored by five independent 'lay' assessors who reviewed pre-therapy video and rated participants' speech on a 4-point Likert Stuttering Probability Scale (1 = 'fluent with no doubt', 2 = 'fluent with some doubt', 3 = 'stuttering with some doubt' and 4 = 'stuttering with no doubt'). RESULTS: No significant differences were found between the primarily overt and primarily covert groups in relation to self-reported symptoms of anxiety, depression, and fear of negative evaluation. However, investigation at item level identified a significant difference in linguistic avoidance between the two groups. CONCLUSION: There may be fewer differences between people with primarily overt and primarily covert stuttering than previously thought with regards to emotional impact, as well as most aspects of avoidance behavior.