Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40540730›Full record

ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2025

Attention Bias in School-Age Children Who Stutter: Evidence From a Dot-Probe Task.

Naomi Eichorn, Luca Campanelli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Naomi EichornSchool of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Memphis, TN.ORCID 0000-0002-0888-6673
Luca CampanelliDivision of Speech-Language Pathology, New York Medical College, NY.ORCID 0000-0001-6035-0545

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeCognitive models of anxiety attribute anxiety and ruminative thought patterns to selective processing of threat-related stimuli that automatically capture attention. We explored whether stuttering was associated with similar attentional biases by examining: (a) whether school-age children who stutter (CWS) differed from controls in selective processing of threat-related and neutral stimuli and (b) whether attentional biases in CWS were specific to threat stimuli that reflected stuttering-related experience.

methodParticipants included 39 children (19 CWS), ages 8 to 15 years. Children completed a dot-probe task in which they responded as quickly as possible to on-screen probes that replaced threat-related or neutral words. Three types of threat words were presented: (a) general threat words; (b) words related to stuttering; and (c) personalized words on which participants anticipated stuttering. Attention bias (AB) was computed based on reaction times for congruent conditions (probe replaced threat stimuli) relative to incongruent conditions (probe replaced neutral stimuli) and compared across groups and stimulus types.

resultsStrong evidence for an AB effect was observed for CWS but not for controls, as demonstrated by faster responses to congruent relative to incongruent trials. Within the stuttering group, AB effects were driven primarily by stuttering-related and personal words but not general threat words.

conclusionsFindings indicate that CWS preferentially allocate attention toward stimuli relevant to stuttering experiences. Further research is needed to clarify how such selective processing may contribute to the development of stuttering-related concerns, psycho-emotional reactions to stuttering, and associated behaviors, such as avoidance of sounds, words, or speaking situations. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.29231180.

Indexed as

AttentionAttentional BiasStutteringAdolescentCase-Control StudiesChildFemaleHumansMaleReaction Time

Identifiers

PMID40540730
PMCPMC12263188

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.