This paper argues against definitions of stuttering which imply that all within-word disfluencies are stuttering and no between-word disfluencies are stuttering. The paper calls for a definition of stuttering that is not contradicted by available empirical information or clinical experience and is logically consistent. (JDD)

The author responds to a study which suggested that token reinforcement is redundant in stating and shaping fluent speech within a stuttering program. He cites methodological differences as well as procedural differences in the treatment programs mentioned. (Author/CL)

This commentary to EC 232 373 and EC 232 374 challenges the use of a speaker-based definition of stuttering and argues that use of the definition may only relocate the judgment reliability problem and raise as many validity problems as a listener-based definition of stuttering does. (JDD)

The authors (Ingham et al.) of the original report respond to criticisms by Kalinowski et al. that they misinterpreted their data in a study of the effects of frequency-altered feedback on stuttering in four single-subject design investigations. They also address larger issues concerning altered auditory feedback procedures. (DB)