ArticleInternational journal of language & communication disorders
Acknowledging a Stutter Affects the Impression One Makes in a Job Interview.
Article in International journal of language & communication disorders. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeople who have a stutter are often viewed negatively by others. Acknowledgement-defined as notifying others up front about characteristics that might lead one to be evaluated negatively-might be an effective impression management strategy for people stigmatized by stuttering. Past research testing this hypothesis, however, has produced inconsistent findings.
aimsTo assess the effectiveness of acknowledgement by people who stutter as a strategy for eliciting more positive evaluations from others while controlling for possible methodological problems in past research. Participants were expected to be more likely overall to find job applicants without a stutter to be better candidates for a job than those with a stutter. However, it was also hypothesized that this difference would not be significant when candidates with a stutter acknowledged it. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Participants watched two simulated job interview videos: in one, the applicant had a stutter, and in the other, they did not. For half of the participants, the applicant who stuttered acknowledged the speech dysfluency at the beginning of the job interview. After watching each interview, the participants rated the interviewee. OUTCOMES &
resultsThe results revealed the predicted significant interaction between stuttering and acknowledgement: acknowledgement of the stutter led the stuttering job candidate to be evaluated just as positively as the non-stuttering job candidate. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: This research has implications for the kind of advice practitioners can offer people anticipating interactions (such as job interviews) where they will be evaluated. The findings also potentially widen the range of circumstances in which acknowledgement can be used to counteract the negative impressions people might be biased to form of stigmatized individuals. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Previous research shows that acknowledging a stigmatized identity (and other forms of acknowledgement) upfront before interacting with others in an evaluative context (such as a job interview) can often improve the impression one makes and how one's performance is perceived. However, past research evaluating this strategy in the case of stuttering has produced inconsistent findings. In addition, some past research suggests that acknowledgement might not be effective when the source of stigma is perceptually salient during the interaction. What this paper adds to the existing knowledge The results of this study, designed to control for possible methodological problems in past research, indicate that acknowledgement can in fact be an effective impression management strategy for people who stutter. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? This research has implications for the kind of advice practitioners can offer people anticipating interactions (such as job interviews) where they will be evaluated. In short, it provides a method for trying to reduce the discrimination a person who stutters might face.
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.