Turkish Version of the Stuttering Severity Instrument-Version 4 (SSI-4)

Abstract

Objectives: The Stuttering Severity Instrument-4 (SSI-4) is a reliable and valid norm-referenced tool used to assess stuttering severity by comparing an individual's speech characteristics to a standardized sample. This study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the SSI-4 for Turkish-speaking adults who stutter. The relationship between the frequency, duration, and physical concomitant behaviors in the SSI-4 and domains of Clinical Use of Self-Reports (CUSR) was also investigated. Materials and Methods: The study included 40 adults who stutter (M/F = 29/11; age range = 18–39, M = 25.8, SD =6). The Turkish translation of SSI-4 was administered to all participants, and the recordings were evaluated by three speech and language therapists. Reliability analysis comprised inter-rater reliability, intra-rater reliability, and test-retest reliability of the Clinical Use of Self-Report (CUSR). Additionally, the correlation between the CUSR and the three main parameters of the SSI-4 was calculated. Results: The SSI-4 demonstrated strong consistency with high inter-rater and intra-rater reliability coefficients (> .90) for the CUSR items. In addition, its test-retest reliability was also found to be high (> .90). However, no strong correlation was found between the CUSR and the SSI-4 parameters such as frequency, duration, and physical concomitants. Conclusion: The study confirms that the Turkish version of SSI-4 is a valid and reliable tool for assessing stuttering severity in Turkish-speaking adults.

Keywords

• stuttering
• stuttering severity
• stuttering severity instrument
• validity
• reliability

Kekemelik Şiddeti Değerlendirme Aracının (SSI-4) Türkçe Versiyonu

Abstract

Amaç: Kekemelik Şiddeti Değerlendirme Aracı (SSI-4), bireyleri bir örneklem ile karşılaştırarak kekemelik şiddetini değerlendirmek için kullanılan norm referanslı güvenilir ve geçerli bir ölçme aracıdır. Bu çalışma, SSI-4'ün Türkçe konuşan kekemeliği olan yetişkinler için geçerlilik ve güvenilirliğini değerlendirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Ayrıca, SSI-4'te yer alan sıklık, süre ve fiziksel eşlik eden davranışlar ile klinik öz değerlendirme ölçeğinin (Clinical Use of Self-Reports- CUSR) alt boyutları arasındaki ilişki incelenmiştir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışmaya 40 kekemeliği olan yetişkin (E/K = 29/11; yaş aralığı = 18–39, M = 25.8, SS = 6) dahil edilmiştir. SSI-4’ün Türkçe versiyonu tüm katılımcılara uygulanmış ve kayıtlar üç dil ve konuşma terapisti tarafından değerlendirilmiştir. Güvenirlik analizi, gözlemciler arası güvenirlik, gözlemci içi güvenirlik ve CUSR test-tekrar test güvenirliğini kapsamıştır. Ayrıca, CUSR ile SSI-4'ün üç ana parametresi (sıklık, süre, fiziksel davranışlar) arasındaki korelasyon hesaplanmıştır. Bulgular: SSI-4, CUSR maddeleri için yapılan gözlemciler arası ve gözlemciler içi tekrarlı değerlendirmelerde yüksek güvenirlik katsayıları (> .90) ile güçlü bir tutarlılık sergilemiştir. Ayrıca test-tekrar test güvenirliği de yüksek bulunmuştur (> .90). Ancak, CUSR ile SSI-4’ün sıklık, süre ve fiziksel davranışlar gibi parametreleri arasındaki korelasyonlar arasında güçlü bir ilişki saptanamamıştır. Sonuç: Çalışma, SSI-4'ün Türkçe versiyonunun Türkçe konuşan kekemeliği olan yetişkinlerde kekemelik şiddetini değerlendirmek için geçerli ve güvenilir bir araç olduğunu doğrulamaktadır.

Keywords

• kekemelik
• kekemelik şiddeti
• kekemelik değerlendirme aracı
• geçerlik
• güvenirlik

References

1. Blomgren, M. (2010). Stuttering treatment for adults: An update on contemporary approaches. Seminars in Speech and Language, 31(04), 272–282. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0030-1265760
2. Chow, H. M., Garnett, E. O., Koenraads, S. P. C., & Chang, S.-E. (2023). Brain developmental trajectories associated with childhood stuttering persistence and recovery. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 60, 101224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2023.101224
3. Craig, A., Blumgart, E., & Tran, Y. (2009). The impact of stuttering on the quality of life in adults who stutter. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 34(2), 61-71. https://do.org/10.1016/j.jfludis.2009.05.002
4. Davidow, J. H. (2020). Reliability and similarity of the stuttering severity instrument-fourth edition and a global severity rating scale. Speech, Language and Hearing, 24(1), 20–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/2050571x.2020.1730545
5. Davidow, J. H., Ye, J., & Edge, R. L. (2023). The reliability of simultaneous versus individual data collection during stuttering assessment. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 58(4), 1251–1267. https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12860
6. Dsouza, A. J., Manivannan, V., & Maruthy, S. (2024). Expectations from stuttering therapy: Qualitative content analysis of client’s perspective in Kannada-speaking adults who stutter. Journal of Communication Disorders, 107, 106388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2023.106388
7. Freud, D., & Amir, O. (2020). Resilience in people who stutter: Association with covert and overt characteristics of stuttering. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 64, 105761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfludis.2020.105761
8. Hayhow, R. (2018). The assessment of stuttering and the evaluation of treatment. In Approaches to the Treatment of Stuttering (pp. 15-46). Routledge.

9. Karimi, H., Nilipour, R., Shafiei, B., & Howell, P. (2011). Translation, assessment and deployment of stuttering instruments into different languages: Comments arising from Bakhtiar et al., investigation of the reliability of the SSI-3 for preschool Persian- speaking children who stutter. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 36(3), 246–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfludis.2011.05.001
10. Karuppali, S., Varghese, A. L., Balasubramanium, R. K., Bajaj, G., & Bhaskaran, U. (2024). Critical Review of Tests for the Assessment of Stuttering. Critical Reviews™ in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 36. https://doi.org/10.1615/CritRevPhysRehabilMed.2023049767
11. Klopfenstein, M., Bernard, K., & Heyman, C. (2019). The study of speech naturalness in Communication Disorders: A systematic review of the literature. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 34(4), 327–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699206.2019.1652692
12. Logan, K. J., Roberts, R. R., Pretto, A. P., & Morey, M. J. (2002). Speaking slowly: Effects of Four Self-Guided Training Approaches on Adults' Speech Rate and Naturalness. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11(2), 163–174. https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2002/016)
13. McDonagh, H. D.-L., Broderick, P., & Monaghan, K. (2023). Eye movement as a simple, cost-effective tool for people who stutter: A case study. South African Journal of Communication Disorders, 70(1). https://doi.org/10.4102/sajcd.v70i1.968
14. Mutlu, A. İ., Tırank, Ş. B., & Gündüz, B. (2020). 6 Ve 16 Yaş Okul Çocukları Arasındaki Ssı-4-Tr/Keşida-4 Dördüncü Baskısının Türkçe Versiyonunun Güvenilirliği ve Geçerliliği. Izmir Democracy University Health Sciences Journal, 3(2), 135-144.
15. Prasse, J. E., & Kikano, G. E. (2008). Stuttering: an overview. American Family Physician, 77(9), 1271–1276.
16. Riley, G. (1994). Stuttering severity instrument for children and adults. PRO-ED.
17. Riley, G. D. (1972). A stuttering severity instrument for children and adults. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 37(3), 314-322. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshd.3703.314
18. Riley, G., & Bakker, K. (2009). SSI-4: Stuttering severity instrument. PRO-ED, an International Publisher.
19. Sønsterud, H., Feragen, K. B., Kirmess, M., Halvorsen, M. S., & Ward, D. (2020). What do people search for in stuttering therapy: Personal goal setting as a gold standard? Journal of Communication Disorders, 85, 105944.
20. Tahmasebi, N., Shafie, B., Karimi, H., & Mazaheri, M. (2018). A Persian-version of the stuttering severity instrument-version four (SSI-4): How the new additions to SSI-4 complement its stuttering severity score? Journal of Communication Disorders, 74, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2018.04.005
21. Tichenor, S. E., & Yaruss, J. S. (2019). Stuttering as defined by adults who stutter. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 62(12), 4356–4369. https://doi.org/10.1044/2019_jslhr-19-00137
22. Todd, H., Mirawdeli, A., Costelloe, S., Cavenagh, P., Davis, S., & Howell, P. (2014). Scores on Riley’s Stuttering Severity Instrument versions three and four for samples of different length and for different types of speech material. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 28(12), 912–926. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699206.2014.926991
23. Weir, J. P. (2005). Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 19(1), 231-240.
24. Yaruss, J. S. (2010). Assessing quality of life in stuttering treatment outcomes research. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 35(3), 190-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfludis.2010.05