S Cyclopamine chemical information consisted of a parent interview, wherein BAY1217389 chemical information information was obtained regarding the family’s SES, history of speech-language and fluency disorders, as well as concerns about children’s speech-language abilities (for further details pertaining to this interview process, see Conture, 2001; Richels Conture, 2010). While one examiner conducted the parent interview, another examiner talked with the child during free play, taking the “on-line” disfluency count, from which measures of speech fluency were obtained. Participants were then given a series of standardized speech and language tests in the following fixed order: GFTA-2, PPVT-4, EVT-2, and TELD-3, a procedure, the authors have found, to maximize the chances that the greatest number of preschool-age children will successfully complete all such testing. Standardized testing was followed by the administration of the KiddyCAT (Clark et al., 2012; Vanryckeghem Brutten, 2007) and bilateral pure tone hearing screenings. Audiometric equipment was routinely calibrated. Testing of participants was conducted in a controlled laboratory environment as part of a pre-experimental diagnosis/screening to determine inclusion/exclusion for subsequentNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript5Although expressed parental concern about stuttering was not used in present talker-group classification, a hypothesis regarding parental concern and frequency of stuttered disfluencies was tested in this study, with findings presented in the results section. J Commun Disord. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 May 01.Tumanova et al.Pageexperimental research (e.g., Arnold et al., 2011; Byrd, Conture, Ohde, 2007; Johnson et al., 2010; Walden et al., 2012).NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript2.4.1. Expressed parental concern–As described above all parents who participated in this study (n = 472) were asked a series of questions about their child’s development, including possible concerns with stuttering. It will be recalled that expressed parental concern about stuttering was not used for talker group classification, but only to address hypothesis 4 in order to assess the association between parent concern and examiner judgment of speech disfluency. This parental judgment was obtained during their initial contact, by means of telephone and/or email, with our research team. Their affirmative/ negative response was recorded and confirmed again at the time of testing. 2.5. Description of dependent variables Dependent measures in this study were as follows: (a) number of stuttered disfluencies (SDs), (b) number of non-stuttered disfluencies (NSDs) and (c) number of total disfluencies or (a) + (b) per 300 words of conversational speech. 2.5.1. Stuttered disfluencies–The following disfluency types were considered to be stuttered: (a) sound-syllable repetition (SSR), (“b-but”, “le-le-lemon”); (b) monosyllabic whole-word repetition (WWR) (“I-I-I”, “my-my-my”); and (c) audible and inaudible sound prolongations (SP) (“mm-mine”, “ssss-some”, “pa–per”). 2.5.2. Non-stuttered (“normal”) disfluencies–The following disfluency types were considered to be non-stuttered (or “normal” disfluencies): (a) phrase repetitions (PR) (“I want ?I want a cookie”); (b) revisions (REV) (“He went ?They went to school”); and (c) interjections (INT) (“uhm”). 2.6. Measurement reliability for identification of disfluencies To assess inter-judge measurement reliability, oft.S consisted of a parent interview, wherein information was obtained regarding the family’s SES, history of speech-language and fluency disorders, as well as concerns about children’s speech-language abilities (for further details pertaining to this interview process, see Conture, 2001; Richels Conture, 2010). While one examiner conducted the parent interview, another examiner talked with the child during free play, taking the “on-line” disfluency count, from which measures of speech fluency were obtained. Participants were then given a series of standardized speech and language tests in the following fixed order: GFTA-2, PPVT-4, EVT-2, and TELD-3, a procedure, the authors have found, to maximize the chances that the greatest number of preschool-age children will successfully complete all such testing. Standardized testing was followed by the administration of the KiddyCAT (Clark et al., 2012; Vanryckeghem Brutten, 2007) and bilateral pure tone hearing screenings. Audiometric equipment was routinely calibrated. Testing of participants was conducted in a controlled laboratory environment as part of a pre-experimental diagnosis/screening to determine inclusion/exclusion for subsequentNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript5Although expressed parental concern about stuttering was not used in present talker-group classification, a hypothesis regarding parental concern and frequency of stuttered disfluencies was tested in this study, with findings presented in the results section. J Commun Disord. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 May 01.Tumanova et al.Pageexperimental research (e.g., Arnold et al., 2011; Byrd, Conture, Ohde, 2007; Johnson et al., 2010; Walden et al., 2012).NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript2.4.1. Expressed parental concern–As described above all parents who participated in this study (n = 472) were asked a series of questions about their child’s development, including possible concerns with stuttering. It will be recalled that expressed parental concern about stuttering was not used for talker group classification, but only to address hypothesis 4 in order to assess the association between parent concern and examiner judgment of speech disfluency. This parental judgment was obtained during their initial contact, by means of telephone and/or email, with our research team. Their affirmative/ negative response was recorded and confirmed again at the time of testing. 2.5. Description of dependent variables Dependent measures in this study were as follows: (a) number of stuttered disfluencies (SDs), (b) number of non-stuttered disfluencies (NSDs) and (c) number of total disfluencies or (a) + (b) per 300 words of conversational speech. 2.5.1. Stuttered disfluencies–The following disfluency types were considered to be stuttered: (a) sound-syllable repetition (SSR), (“b-but”, “le-le-lemon”); (b) monosyllabic whole-word repetition (WWR) (“I-I-I”, “my-my-my”); and (c) audible and inaudible sound prolongations (SP) (“mm-mine”, “ssss-some”, “pa–per”). 2.5.2. Non-stuttered (“normal”) disfluencies–The following disfluency types were considered to be non-stuttered (or “normal” disfluencies): (a) phrase repetitions (PR) (“I want ?I want a cookie”); (b) revisions (REV) (“He went ?They went to school”); and (c) interjections (INT) (“uhm”). 2.6. Measurement reliability for identification of disfluencies To assess inter-judge measurement reliability, oft.
