Purpose: The contextual variability of stuttering events makes it difficult to reliably elicit stuttered speech in laboratory settings. As a result, studies that compare stuttered versus fluent speech are difficult to conduct and, thus, are limited in the literature. The purpose of the current study is to describe a novel approach to elicit stuttering during laboratory testing. Method: A semistructured clinical interview leveraging the phenomenon of stuttering anticipation was administered to 22 adults who stutter (1st visit). The interview was used to generate participant-specific anticipated and unanticipated word lists, which were used as stimuli during a 2nd visit so that the validity of the method could be tested. Results: The method yielded a near-equal distribution of unambiguously stuttered and fluent utterances (43.6% and 43.5%, respectively). Moreover, 12.9% of the utterances were judged to be ambiguous, that is, not unambiguously stuttered or fluent. Conclusion: This approach outperformed previous attempts to elicit stuttering during laboratory testing. It could be implemented in future studies that compare neural, physiological, or behavioral correlates of fluent versus stuttered speech.