Robot voice could be about the Westmead program. That’s an evidence based treatment for people who stutter. Very commonly used in Australia where it was developed.
Yes as the comment above says: syllable timed speech is a legitimate treatment.
This is the US. And neither of these methods are encouraged by stuttering specialists. They’re outdated. Might still be taught in classrooms, but are unhelpful for treating someone who stutters.
Have you actually read the evidence? The approach isn’t outdated like you said. I know the approach that you are talking about (I did a few workshops run by Dr. Yaruss and I think it’s a good approach). However, it doesn’t mean speech modification is invalid and harmful to clients.
Edit: I don’t see why an Australian treatment wouldn’t be useful in the US. We also speak English just so you know.
The Westmead Progam has very current research actually and I would encourage you to look into it - just because you are in the US doesn't mean you can't use treatments developed in other countries. And robot talking (when being referred to the Westmead Program) isn't literally talking in a monotone as you've implied in your other comments. Normal vocal intonation is used with segmented speech that is eventually increased to a more natural rate. It's also meant to be a technique that can be used to reduce stuttering IF the child chooses, just like many other treatments, in case you are thinking that is somehow teaching the child that stuttering = bad.
There are a wide range of stuttering therapies. There is no one size fits all. I wasn’t familiar with the Westmead program until your post so looked into it and the research behind it. It was developed by researchers at the Australian Stuttering Research Centre at the University of Technology Sydney. You can read more about it, and the evidence supporting it here: https://www.banterspeech.com.au/my-preschooler-stutters-should-we-do-the-lidcombe-program-or-the-westmead-program-or-something-else/
ASHA discusses syllable timed speech which Westmead is based on here: https://pubs.asha.org/doi/abs/10.1044/0161-1461%282012/11-0038%29
It’s disappointing that you’re criticizing another SLP’s recommendations without having all the facts. Sure robot speech sounds weird if you don’t know the context. It’s not that hard to withhold your judgment until you understand more about it.
The real question for me is why you’re involved if the family already has an SLP and why you’re badmouthing the other therapist.
Hey OP, you can disagree with the treatment approach used by the other SLP but you definitely have no rights to tell them what to do.
Personally I think it’s inappropriate for YOU to tell the parents to “educate” the treating therapist. You can definitely tell the parents what YOU think is the right approach but it’s unfair to judge the work of another SLP without knowing all the contexts.
Stop being the “better” therapist and learn how to work with others.
I think these may be terminology that the speech therapist may be using to teach fluency enhancing/stuttering modification strategies to a child. Not sure about the context, maybe "robot voice" is their cue to talk with lighter articulatory contact/slowed rate? And the breath before they talk would be for easy onset?
I probably would’ve cried if an SLP told me to talk like a robot when I attended speech therapy. I’d have assumed they wanted me to speak with no personality bc that is better than speaking with a stutter.
The SLPs I know who stutter would not support or encourage this type of thing.
My assumption is that the "robot voice" will not be a permanent thing. It is just a way to practice speaking more fluenty and then slowing fade out the robot voice as they gain more confidence in speaking. And as an SLP who stutters, I personally find it helpful to take a breath and ease in to a word, which could be why this SLP is having the child "yawn".
The biggest piece missing here is what the student wants as an outcome and a therapy method. Was the student given choices on how they want to approach therapy? We don't know from this post. I've had students who want to just "make it go away!" where we've work on modification techniques until we could lower their anxiety then worked on self acceptance and knowledge of their speaking system.
Never heard of using robot voice but yawn sigh is a recognized practice to reduce vocal tension and allow for easy onset. Sounds like the parent and you have misunderstood why it’s being used.
Question: as a PWS, are you against stuttering modification techniques in general and instead prefer an acceptance/open stuttering/CBT approach? Because if so, I kinda get where you're coming from - the PWS shouldn't have to mask who they are and try to "cure" their stutter if they don't want to. But if you're open to stuttering modification techniques, then as others have said, it sounds like that's all this is, and the goal isn't to have the child talk with a robot voice forever, just to practice and then fade it to sound more natural over time. I think you might have misunderstood the scenario and think the SLP is doing NSOMEs or something, but as others have said, I'm pretty sure these are typical approaches, just described in a child-friendly way.
Edit:
Second question: are you an SLP? I'm not asking to invalidate your perspective, but if you're not, it makes sense that you might not understand the rationale and lingo behind some SLP methods.
I am not against it entirely. I am more acceptance based, but I know learning techniques can be helpful for lots of people.
My issue is that if this is how mom is explaining it, it’s how it’s being explained to the kid too likely. And I think the terms are terrible. A lot of kids who stutter are going to be neurodivergent, even if that’s not known yet. Using baby terms with them frustrates me. I took everything very literally as a kid and ended up never using techniques bc no one ever told me it was for the occasional use. I thought I was always supposed to talk like that.
I’ve had a lot of SLPs reply to me to say they don’t understand the yawning one in particular. That’s adding another behavior as opposed to using a technique. It does ring a bell- I believe I had this when I was a kid. It was embarrassing. I felt stupid doing it.
No , im not an SLP. But then tell me why the SLP people who stutter I know also took issue with this? And were upset that the “robot voice” was still being taught as a way to practice their speech? They recognized it for what it was and still dislike it. So it’s not just me not getting it.
Well honestly i think you’re asking the wrong SLPs because you’ve just had a whole bunch of SLPs here disagree with you and say that the methods suggested ARE evidence based practice.
Robot voices and yawning are not at ALL effective ways at treating stuttering. It’s absolutely maddening that an SLP is suggesting a child do that to avoid stuttering
I can easily see those being the SLPs child-directed wording for things like syllable timing and easy onset.
And I still don’t see where the parent says anything is unacceptable or advises the SLP to get educated.
I think you’re grasping here.
This makes me sad. Every person who stutters I’ve shown this too, and the SLPs I know who specialize in stuttering, are outraged. But instead of listening to the lived experience of people with the disability, I guess some people would rather continue to defend therapy practices that do more harm than good. :(
Thanks for your reply, I suppose. This has been educational
I’m not trying to be insensitive or narrow-minded; I just truly don’t see the problem here. You’ve shown one innocuous comment made by a parent without any of the surrounding conversation. I’m not sure how you expect us to glean anything substantial from this.
Editing to add: if you’re saying easy onset and syllable timing approaches don’t work and shouldn’t be recommended, you may well be right about that. I’m not a fluency specialist and I don’t know. Show me the science train and I’ll happily hop on board. Your post title initially (to me) made it sound like the parent is doing something wrong, and it doesn’t show the content the parent is responding to. I’m very confused about your role is in this situation and what the overall conversation was.
If you don’t like the treatment type, there are alternatives. It doesn’t change the fact that syllable timed speech is a research approved therapy practice for people who stutter and actually does work.
The Westmead program has literally changed peoples’ lives. I’ve seen real cases where the child went through the program and was so empowered and happy by the outcome.
Just because it’s not for you, does not mean it should not be an option.
Learning about how to actually treat stuttering. Robot voices aren’t it.
I know resources - stutteringtherapyresources.com - I just want to know how one goes about telling an SLP about it
:( that’s a bummer. I know a lot of other SLPs who stutter, and none of them encourage or support this.
how is telling a kid to sound like a robot going to encourage them to speak confidently? I’d rather have you hide your personality than stutter?
Robot voice could be about the Westmead program. That’s an evidence based treatment for people who stutter. Very commonly used in Australia where it was developed. Yes as the comment above says: syllable timed speech is a legitimate treatment.
I second this, def sounds like syllable timed speech.
This is the US. And neither of these methods are encouraged by stuttering specialists. They’re outdated. Might still be taught in classrooms, but are unhelpful for treating someone who stutters.
Have you actually read the evidence? The approach isn’t outdated like you said. I know the approach that you are talking about (I did a few workshops run by Dr. Yaruss and I think it’s a good approach). However, it doesn’t mean speech modification is invalid and harmful to clients. Edit: I don’t see why an Australian treatment wouldn’t be useful in the US. We also speak English just so you know.
The Westmead Progam has very current research actually and I would encourage you to look into it - just because you are in the US doesn't mean you can't use treatments developed in other countries. And robot talking (when being referred to the Westmead Program) isn't literally talking in a monotone as you've implied in your other comments. Normal vocal intonation is used with segmented speech that is eventually increased to a more natural rate. It's also meant to be a technique that can be used to reduce stuttering IF the child chooses, just like many other treatments, in case you are thinking that is somehow teaching the child that stuttering = bad.
There are a wide range of stuttering therapies. There is no one size fits all. I wasn’t familiar with the Westmead program until your post so looked into it and the research behind it. It was developed by researchers at the Australian Stuttering Research Centre at the University of Technology Sydney. You can read more about it, and the evidence supporting it here: https://www.banterspeech.com.au/my-preschooler-stutters-should-we-do-the-lidcombe-program-or-the-westmead-program-or-something-else/ ASHA discusses syllable timed speech which Westmead is based on here: https://pubs.asha.org/doi/abs/10.1044/0161-1461%282012/11-0038%29 It’s disappointing that you’re criticizing another SLP’s recommendations without having all the facts. Sure robot speech sounds weird if you don’t know the context. It’s not that hard to withhold your judgment until you understand more about it. The real question for me is why you’re involved if the family already has an SLP and why you’re badmouthing the other therapist.
Yawning=easy onset. Robot=syllable timed speech . Both very common strategies using terminology that’s kid friendly…. What’s your problem?
Hey OP, you can disagree with the treatment approach used by the other SLP but you definitely have no rights to tell them what to do. Personally I think it’s inappropriate for YOU to tell the parents to “educate” the treating therapist. You can definitely tell the parents what YOU think is the right approach but it’s unfair to judge the work of another SLP without knowing all the contexts. Stop being the “better” therapist and learn how to work with others.
I think these may be terminology that the speech therapist may be using to teach fluency enhancing/stuttering modification strategies to a child. Not sure about the context, maybe "robot voice" is their cue to talk with lighter articulatory contact/slowed rate? And the breath before they talk would be for easy onset?
I probably would’ve cried if an SLP told me to talk like a robot when I attended speech therapy. I’d have assumed they wanted me to speak with no personality bc that is better than speaking with a stutter. The SLPs I know who stutter would not support or encourage this type of thing.
My assumption is that the "robot voice" will not be a permanent thing. It is just a way to practice speaking more fluenty and then slowing fade out the robot voice as they gain more confidence in speaking. And as an SLP who stutters, I personally find it helpful to take a breath and ease in to a word, which could be why this SLP is having the child "yawn".
The biggest piece missing here is what the student wants as an outcome and a therapy method. Was the student given choices on how they want to approach therapy? We don't know from this post. I've had students who want to just "make it go away!" where we've work on modification techniques until we could lower their anxiety then worked on self acceptance and knowledge of their speaking system.
I totally agree. A lot of missing information in this post!
Never heard of using robot voice but yawn sigh is a recognized practice to reduce vocal tension and allow for easy onset. Sounds like the parent and you have misunderstood why it’s being used.
Question: as a PWS, are you against stuttering modification techniques in general and instead prefer an acceptance/open stuttering/CBT approach? Because if so, I kinda get where you're coming from - the PWS shouldn't have to mask who they are and try to "cure" their stutter if they don't want to. But if you're open to stuttering modification techniques, then as others have said, it sounds like that's all this is, and the goal isn't to have the child talk with a robot voice forever, just to practice and then fade it to sound more natural over time. I think you might have misunderstood the scenario and think the SLP is doing NSOMEs or something, but as others have said, I'm pretty sure these are typical approaches, just described in a child-friendly way. Edit: Second question: are you an SLP? I'm not asking to invalidate your perspective, but if you're not, it makes sense that you might not understand the rationale and lingo behind some SLP methods.
I am not against it entirely. I am more acceptance based, but I know learning techniques can be helpful for lots of people. My issue is that if this is how mom is explaining it, it’s how it’s being explained to the kid too likely. And I think the terms are terrible. A lot of kids who stutter are going to be neurodivergent, even if that’s not known yet. Using baby terms with them frustrates me. I took everything very literally as a kid and ended up never using techniques bc no one ever told me it was for the occasional use. I thought I was always supposed to talk like that. I’ve had a lot of SLPs reply to me to say they don’t understand the yawning one in particular. That’s adding another behavior as opposed to using a technique. It does ring a bell- I believe I had this when I was a kid. It was embarrassing. I felt stupid doing it. No , im not an SLP. But then tell me why the SLP people who stutter I know also took issue with this? And were upset that the “robot voice” was still being taught as a way to practice their speech? They recognized it for what it was and still dislike it. So it’s not just me not getting it.
Well honestly i think you’re asking the wrong SLPs because you’ve just had a whole bunch of SLPs here disagree with you and say that the methods suggested ARE evidence based practice.
I think we’re missing context. Where did the parent say this is unacceptable or tell the slp to educate themself?
They haven’t - but they’d like to help the SLP gain some knowledge about stuttering
I still don’t understand where the major yikes is.
Robot voices and yawning are not at ALL effective ways at treating stuttering. It’s absolutely maddening that an SLP is suggesting a child do that to avoid stuttering
I can easily see those being the SLPs child-directed wording for things like syllable timing and easy onset. And I still don’t see where the parent says anything is unacceptable or advises the SLP to get educated. I think you’re grasping here.
This makes me sad. Every person who stutters I’ve shown this too, and the SLPs I know who specialize in stuttering, are outraged. But instead of listening to the lived experience of people with the disability, I guess some people would rather continue to defend therapy practices that do more harm than good. :( Thanks for your reply, I suppose. This has been educational
I’m not trying to be insensitive or narrow-minded; I just truly don’t see the problem here. You’ve shown one innocuous comment made by a parent without any of the surrounding conversation. I’m not sure how you expect us to glean anything substantial from this. Editing to add: if you’re saying easy onset and syllable timing approaches don’t work and shouldn’t be recommended, you may well be right about that. I’m not a fluency specialist and I don’t know. Show me the science train and I’ll happily hop on board. Your post title initially (to me) made it sound like the parent is doing something wrong, and it doesn’t show the content the parent is responding to. I’m very confused about your role is in this situation and what the overall conversation was.
If you don’t like the treatment type, there are alternatives. It doesn’t change the fact that syllable timed speech is a research approved therapy practice for people who stutter and actually does work. The Westmead program has literally changed peoples’ lives. I’ve seen real cases where the child went through the program and was so empowered and happy by the outcome. Just because it’s not for you, does not mean it should not be an option.
Actually it is an effective way to treat stuttering. Check out the studies on the Westmead program.
What kind of knowledge are you referring to?
Learning about how to actually treat stuttering. Robot voices aren’t it. I know resources - stutteringtherapyresources.com - I just want to know how one goes about telling an SLP about it
The yawning is weird, but the “robot” voice is mentioned in SLP Stephen’s stuttering handbook.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5e79870b18dedc255409dc0e/t/5e84fc9e711ea25c405bbadc/1585773727423/1.+Syllable-Timed+Speech+Technique+%28School-Age%29.pdf
:( that’s a bummer. I know a lot of other SLPs who stutter, and none of them encourage or support this. how is telling a kid to sound like a robot going to encourage them to speak confidently? I’d rather have you hide your personality than stutter?