(This dates back to the 1997 like the previous posts)

> From: Darrell Dodge > Subject: Re: Fluency techniques Hi Darrell, I said: 

> > yes, blocks occur "in the brain" but no, 

> > NOT NECESSARILY as a result of fear. Fear certainly contributes to whatever

 > > factors trigger blocks, but its absence is no guarantee of fluency. I say 

> > this from personal experience. I have long eliminated all concerns about 

> > stuttering on any words but an occasional block still manages to catch me 

> > by surprise. NONE is a result of any fear or "expectation" on my part. >  

You said: .... 

> perceptions that are quicker than our consciousness. I think there's pretty 

> good agreement that there are many things like this that can send us into a 

> block: external and internal physical cues, warnings, or reminders of 

> stuttering. Van Riper talks about this and Einer Boberg wrote about residual 

> "micro-stutters" in the speech of "recovered" PWS. These warnings can be 

> "perceived" subconsciously. 

 

 I had a similar discussion with John Harrison a while back. Of course there is no way I can prove that there isn't some perverse subconscious motivation for every single block I have. Nor can you prove that there is. At some point one model simply becomes more parsimonious than the other, at least in my mind and that of others. When blocks happen in very "unloaded" circumstances and side conversations, for instance, I'm talking with my date at a restaurant, and I casually ask the waiter for a glass of water, WITHOUT any thought or concern for the request, and I block on "glass", while I had been completely fluent with my date, you simply have to wonder. I can see your wheels already spinning... I know you can concoct some good psychological reasons why suddenly "glass" could have become so loaded and important that my speech mechanism decides to grind to a halt... but you have to start wondering. Please do, for just a second. Think of stuttering as a grain of sand loose in your speech engine. If you build fear around specific words, you create the bottlenecks where the grain of sand is most likely to get stuck (and stop the engine), but even if you eliminate such fears, the grain of sand is still there and occasionally it gets stuck in random places. The question is not "is this the correct model?". We can't answer that now. Rather "is this model worthy of serious consideration?". I think so, because the consequences are rather profound from the point of view of research. It shifts the focus from the psychological reasons why, somehow, we start fearing words and making our life difficult, to looking for the $%#!! grain of sand that is causing the problem. Let me repeat my mantra: "We start fearing words BECAUSE there is something wrong ... we DON'T CAUSE what's wrong because we fear words". Although, it is certainly true that "fear" makes the problem worse and it can be (and should be) approached with therapy. ... >Van Riper talks about this and Einer Boberg wrote about residual >"micro-stutters" in the speech of "recovered" PWS. ... I worry about the following: "residual (micro?)stuttering" tends to be dismissed by SPLs, and understandably so, for two reasons. 1) It is no longer perceived as a serious "problem" and 2) There are no therapeutic tools to deal with it. This is fine from a "therapy" point of view. I fall into this cathegory and I haven't felt the need for therapy in a long time, but, FROM A RESEARCH POINT OF VIEW, this is an area that has the potential to bring in a deep understanding of primary causes. SLP will say "what's left is no longer THE problem", I say "what's left may well be THE problem".... Just when all the confusing factors that contribute to the problem (fears, learning bad reactions etc.) have been eliminated and one could look at the straight core physiological cause, the research community (it seems to me) packs up and leaves. The fact is: nobody is going to start looking until there is at least some degree of belief in this possibility. This is why I and others keep hammering away at this.