A component analysis of awareness training for reducing speech disfluencies
Start with live awareness drills; add video self-watch only if fluency stalls after one session.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Montes et al. (2021) worked with five college students who stuttered.
Each student got three short training blocks: video self-review alone, in-vivo coaching alone, and both together.
The team counted speech disfluencies every minute to see which block helped most.
What they found
In-vivo coaching alone cut stutters fast.
Adding video self-review on top gave an extra small bump for most students.
When video came first, gains were weaker; order mattered.
How this fits with other research
Koegel et al. (1992) and Frederiksen et al. (1978) also blended practice plus self-critique, but they used video to improve kids’ social skills and teachers’ signals.
Their positive results line up with the fluency gains seen here, showing the package travels across ages and targets.
Strang et al. (2017) relied on passive video modeling for parents of children with autism and still saw modest gains; Montes adds the twist that active in-vivo rehearsal is the real engine, with video as a back-up booster.
Why it matters
If a client’s fluency barely moves after one session of live coaching, layer in a two-minute self-video review next time.
Keep the in-vivo practice first; use video only if needed.
This saves you time and keeps the intervention lean.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Run five minutes of in-vivo awareness practice, graph stutters, then decide if tonight’s homework video is needed.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Recent literature supports using an awareness training treatment package to decrease speech disfluencies for college students delivering short speeches. This package includes identifying speech disfluencies first via a video recording (video training), then during in vivo speech practice (in vivo training). However, the literature lacks an evaluation of these subcomponents, which poses a barrier to better understanding the efficiency, social validity, and potential underlying behavioral principles of awareness training. We conducted an add-in component analysis with 8 college students by implementing either video or in vivo training first, evaluating treatment effects via a posttest, then implementing the remaining subcomponent, if warranted. We found that in vivo speech practice may be sufficient for reducing disfluencies for some participants, but a treatment package including the sequential application of both video and in vivo training is more likely to result in marked behavior change.
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2021 · doi:10.1002/jaba.795