ArticleJournal of fluency disorders2020
Visual exogenous and endogenous attention and visual memory in preschool children who stutter.
Article in Journal of fluency disorders, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAttention develops gradually from infancy to the preschool years and beyond. Exogenous attention, consisting of automatic responses to salient stimuli, develops in infancy, whereas endogenous attention, or voluntary attention, begins to develop later, in the preschool years. The purpose of this study was to examine (a) exogenous and endogenous attention in young children who stutter (CWS) and children who do not stutter (CWNS) through two conditions of a visual sustained selective attention task, and (b) visual short-term memory (STM) between groups within the context of this task.
method42 CWS and 42 CWNS, ages 3;0-5;5 (years;months), were pair-matched in age, gender (31 males, 11 females per group), and socioeconomic status. Children completed a visual tracking task (Track-It Task; Fisher et al., 2013) requiring sustained selective attention and engaging exogenous and endogenous processes. Following each item, children were asked to recall the item they had tracked, as a memory check.
resultsThe CWS group demonstrated significantly less accuracy in overall tracking and visual memory for the tracked stimuli, compared to the CWNS group. Across groups, the children performed better in sustained selective attention when the target stimuli were more salient (the condition tapping both exogenous and endogenous attention) than when stimuli were less so (the condition tapping primarily endogenous processes).
conclusionsRelative to peers, preschool-age CWS, as a group, display weaknesses in visual sustained selective attention and visual STM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.