Monster Study

Last updated

The Monster Study was a stuttering experiment performed on 22 orphan children in Davenport, Iowa in 1939. It was conducted by Wendell Johnson at the University of Iowa. Graduate student Mary Tudor conducted the experiment under Johnson's supervision. Half of the children received positive speech therapy, praising the fluency of their speech, and the other half, negative speech therapy, belittling the children for speech imperfections. Many of the normal speaking orphan children who received negative therapy in the experiment suffered negative psychological effects, and some retained speech problems for the rest of their lives.

Contents

It was dubbed the "Monster Study" as some of Johnson's peers were horrified that he would experiment on orphan children to confirm a hypothesis. The experiment was kept hidden for fear Johnson's reputation would be tarnished in the wake of human experiments conducted by the Nazis during World War II. Because the results of the study were never published in any peer-reviewed journal, Tudor's thesis is the only official record of the details of the experiment. [1]

The University of Iowa publicly apologized for the Monster Study in 2001. However, Paticia Zebrowski, University of Iowa assistant professor of speech pathology and audiology notes that the data that resulted from the experiment is the "largest collection of scientific information" on the phenomenon of stuttering and that Johnson's work was the first to discuss the importance of the stutterer's thoughts, attitudes, beliefs, and feelings and continues to influence views on stuttering greatly. [2]

Study

The researchers had four questions in mind when carrying out the study:

  1. will 'removing' the label 'stutterer' from those who have been so labeled have any effect on their speech fluency?;
  2. will endorsement of the label 'stutterer' previously applied to an individual have any effect on their speech fluency?;
  3. will endorsement of the label 'normal speaker' previously applied to an individual have any effect on their speech fluency?; and
  4. will labelling a person previously regarded as a normal speaker, a 'stutterer' have any effect on their speech fluency?

The research began with a selection of twenty-two subjects from a veterans' orphanage in Iowa. None were told the intent of her research, and they believed that they were there to receive speech therapy. Tudor was trying to induce stuttering in healthy children and to see whether telling stutterers that their speech was fine would produce a change. Included among the twenty-two subjects were ten orphans whom teachers and matrons had marked as stutterers before the study began. Tudor and five other graduate students who agreed to serve as judges listened to each of the children speak, graded them on a scale from 1 (poor) to 5 (fluent) and concurred with the school's assessment. Five were assigned to Group IA, the experimental set, and would be told that their speech was fine. The five in Group IB, the control group, would be told that their speech is "as bad as people say".[ citation needed ]

The remaining 12 children were chosen at random from the population of normally fluent orphans. Six of these were assigned to IIA. These children, ranging in age from 5 to 15, were to be told that their speech was horrible, that they were beginning to stutter, and that they must correct this immediately. The final six children in Group IIB, similar in age to those in IIA, were normal speakers who were to be treated as such and given compliments on their nice enunciation.

On the first visit, Tudor tested each child's I.Q. and identified whether they were left-handed or right-handed. A popular theory at the time held that stuttering was caused by a cerebral imbalance. If, for example, a person was born left-handed but was using their right hand, their nerve impulses would misfire, affecting their speech. Johnson did not believe the theory, but still suggested Tudor test each child's handedness. She had them draw on chalkboards and squeeze the bulb of a dynamometer. Most were right-handed, but left-handed children were present in all the groups. There was no correlation between handedness and speech in the subjects. During this period, they assigned numbers to the children, such as "Case No 15 Experimental Group IIA..." [3]

The experimental period lasted from January until late May 1939, and the actual intervention consisted of Tudor driving to Davenport from Iowa City every few weeks and talking with each child for about 45 minutes. She followed an agreed-upon script. In her dissertation, she reported that she talked to the stuttering youngsters who were going to be told that they did not stutter. She said to them, in part, "You'll outgrow [the stuttering], and you will be able to speak even much better than you are speaking now... Pay no attention to what others say about your speaking ability for undoubtedly they do not realize that this is only a phase." [4]

To the non-stuttering youngsters in IIA, who were to be branded stutterers, she said: "The staff has come to the conclusion that you have a great deal of trouble with your speech… You have many of the symptoms of a child who is beginning to stutter. You must try to stop yourself immediately. Use your will power… Do anything to keep from stuttering… Don't ever speak unless you can do it right. You see how [the name of a child in the institution who stuttered severely] stutters, don't you? Well, he undoubtedly started this very same way." [4]

The children in IIA responded immediately. After her second session with 5-year-old Norma Jean Pugh, Tudor wrote, "It was very difficult to get her to speak, although she spoke very freely the month before." Another in the group, 9-year-old Betty Romp, "practically refuses to talk," a researcher wrote in his final evaluation. "Held hand or arm over eyes most of the time." Hazel Potter, 15, the oldest in her group, became "much more conscious of herself, and she talked less," Tudor noted. Potter also began to interject and to snap her fingers in frustration. She was asked why she said 'a' so much. "Because I'm afraid I can't say the next word." "Why did you snap your fingers?" "Because I was afraid I was going to say 'a.'"

All the children's schoolwork fell off. One of the boys began refusing to recite in class. The other, eleven-year-old Clarence Fifer, started anxiously correcting himself. "He stopped and told me he was going to have trouble on words before he said them," Tudor reported. She asked him how he knew. He said that the sound "wouldn't come out. Feels like it's stuck in there."

The sixth orphan, Mary Korlaske, a 12-year-old, grew withdrawn and fractious. During their sessions, Tudor asked whether her best friend knew about her 'stuttering,' Korlaske muttered, "No." "Why not?" Korlaske shuffled her feet. "I hardly ever talk to her." Two years later, she ran away from the orphanage and eventually ended up at the rougher Industrial School for Girls — simultaneously escaping her human experimentation.

Mary Tudor herself wasn't untouched. Three times after her experiment had officially ended, she returned to the orphanage to voluntarily provide follow-up care. She told the IIA children that they didn't stutter after all. The impact, however well-meaning, was questionable. She wrote to Johnson about the orphans in a slightly defensive letter dated April 22, 1940, "I believe that in time they … will recover, but we certainly made a definite impression on them." [4]

Criticism

The results of the study were freely available in the library of the University of Iowa, but Johnson did not seek publication of the results. The experiment became national news in the wake of a series of articles conducted by an investigative reporter at the San Jose Mercury News in 2001, and a book titled Ethics: A Case Study from Fluency was written to provide an impartial scientific evaluation. The panel of authors in the book consists mostly of speech pathologists who fail to reach any consensus on either the ethical ramifications or scientific consequences of the Monster Study. Richard Schwartz concludes in Chapter 6 of the book that the Monster Study "was unfortunate in Tudor and Johnson's lack of regard for the potential harm to the children who participated and in their selection of institutionalized children simply because they were easily available. The deception and the apparent lack of debriefing were also not justifiable."[ citation needed ] Other authors concur claiming the orphan experiment was not within the ethical boundaries of acceptable research. Others, however, felt that the ethical standards in 1939 were different from those used today. Some felt the study was poorly designed and executed by Tudor, and as a result the data offered no proof of Johnson's subsequent hypothesis that "stuttering begins, not in the child's mouth but in the parent's ear"[ citation needed ]—i.e., that it is the well-meaning parent's effort to help the child avoid what the parent has labeled "stuttering" (but is in fact within the range of normal speech) that contributes to what ultimately becomes the problem diagnosed as stuttering.

Compensation

On 17 August 2007, seven of the orphan children were awarded a total of $925,000 by the State of Iowa for lifelong psychological and emotional scars caused by six months of torment during the University of Iowa experiment. The study learned that although none of the children became stutterers, some became self-conscious and reluctant to speak. [5] A spokesman for the University of Iowa called the experiment "regrettable" and added: "This is a study that should never be considered defensible in any era. In no way would I ever think of defending this study. In no way. It’s more than unfortunate." [6] Before her death, Mary Tudor expressed deep regret about her role in the Monster Study and maintained that Wendell Johnson should have done more to reverse the negative effects on the orphan children's speech.

Story origins

The lawsuit was an outgrowth of a San Jose Mercury News article in 2001 conducted by an investigative reporter.

The article revealed that several of the orphans had long-lasting psychological effects stemming from the experiment. The state tried unsuccessfully to have the lawsuit dismissed but in September 2005, Iowa's Supreme Court justices agreed with a lower court in rejecting the state's claim of immunity and petition for dismissal.

Many of the orphans testified that they were harmed by the "Monster Study" but outside of Mary Tudor, who testified in a deposition on November 19, 2002, there were no eyewitnesses. The advanced age of the three surviving former orphans on the plaintiff's side helped expedite a settlement with the state.

For the plaintiffs, we hope and believe it will help provide closure relating to experiences from long ago and to memories going back almost 70 years. For all parties, it ends long-running, difficult and costly litigation that only would have run up more expenses and delayed resolution to plaintiffs who are in their seventies and eighties. [7]

Despite the settlement, the debate remains contentious over what harm, if any, the Monster Study caused the orphan children. Nicholas Johnson, the son of the late Wendell Johnson, has vehemently defended his father. He and some speech pathologists have argued that Wendell Johnson did not intend to harm the orphan children and that none of the orphans were diagnosed as "stutterers" at the end of the experiment. Other speech pathologists have condemned the experiment and said that the orphans' speech and behavior was adversely affected by the negative conditioning they received. Letters between Mary Tudor and Wendell Johnson that were written shortly after the experiment ended showed that the children's speech had deteriorated significantly. Mary Tudor returned to the orphanage three times to try to reverse the negative effects caused by the experiment but lamented the fact that she was unable to provide enough positive therapy to reverse the deleterious effects.[ citation needed ]

Today, the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association prohibits experimentation on children when there exists a significant chance of causing lasting harmful consequences.

Related Research Articles

Stuttering, also known as stammering, is a speech disorder characterized externally by involuntary repetitions and prolongations of sounds, syllables, words, or phrases as well as involuntary silent pauses or blocks in which the person who stutters is unable to produce sounds.

Speech disorders, impairments, or impediments, are a type of communication disorder in which normal speech is disrupted. This can mean fluency disorders like stuttering, cluttering or lisps. Someone who is unable to speak due to a speech disorder is considered mute. Speech skills are vital to social relationships and learning, and delays or disorders that relate to developing these skills can impact individuals function. For many children and adolescents, this can present as issues with academics. Speech disorders affect roughly 11.5% of the US population, and 5% of the primary school population. Speech is a complex process that requires precise timing, nerve and muscle control, and as a result is susceptible to impairments. A person who has a stroke, an accident or birth defect may have speech and language problems.

Wendell Johnson was an American psychologist, author and was a proponent of general semantics. His life work contributed greatly to speech–language pathology, particularly in understanding the area of stuttering, as Johnson himself stuttered. The Wendell Johnson Speech and Hearing Center at University of Iowa is named after him. Aside from his contributions to stuttering, he posthumerously became known for his controversial experiment nicknamed "The Monster Study."

The international adoption of South Korean children was at first started as a result of a large number of orphaned mixed children from the Korean War after 1953, but later included orphaned Korean children. Religious organizations in the United States, Australia, and many Western European nations slowly developed into the apparatus that sustained international adoption as a socially integrated system. This system, however, is essentially gone as of 2020. The number of children given for adoption is lower than in comparable OECD countries of a similar size, the majority of adoptees are adopted by South Korean families, and the number of international adoptees is at a historical low.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mary Cover Jones</span> American developmental psychologist

Mary Cover Jones was an American developmental psychologist and a pioneer of behavior therapy, despite the field being heavily dominated by males throughout much of the 20th century. Joseph Wolpe dubbed her "the mother of behavior therapy" due to her famous study of Peter and development of desensitization.

Judith Maginnis Kuster, aka Judith A. Kuster, is a certified speech-language pathologist and Professor Emerita from Minnesota State University, Mankato where she taught in the Department of Speech, Hearing and Rehabilitation Services for 25 years. She holds an MS in speech-language pathology from the University of Wisconsin, Madison and an MS in counseling from Minnesota State University, Mankato. She is an ASHA FELLOW and a Board Recognized Specialist in Fluency BRSF-R.

Language deprivation experiments have been claimed to have been attempted at least four times through history, isolating infants from the normal use of spoken or signed language in an attempt to discover the fundamental character of human nature or the origin of language.

In operant conditioning, punishment is any change in a human or animal's surroundings which, occurring after a given behavior or response, reduces the likelihood of that behavior occurring again in the future. As with reinforcement, it is the behavior, not the human/animal, that is punished. Whether a change is or is not punishing is determined by its effect on the rate that the behavior occurs. This is called motivating operations (MO), because they alter the effectiveness of a stimulus. MO can be categorized in abolishing operations, decrease the effectiveness of the stimuli and establishing, increase the effectiveness of the stimuli. For example, a painful stimulus which would act as a punisher for most people may actually reinforce some behaviors of masochistic individuals.

Delayed Auditory Feedback (DAF), also called delayed sidetone, is a type of altered auditory feedback that consists of extending the time between speech and auditory perception. It can consist of a device that enables a user to speak into a microphone and then hear their voice in headphones a fraction of a second later. Some DAF devices are hardware; DAF computer software is also available. Most delays that produce a noticeable effect are between 50–200 milliseconds (ms). DAF usage has been shown to induce mental stress.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Electronic fluency device</span> Devices intended to improve the fluency of persons who stutter

Electronic fluency devices are electronic devices intended to improve the fluency of persons who stutter. Most electronic fluency devices change the sound of the user's voice in his or her ear.

<i>Silent Hill: Orphan</i> 2007 video game

Silent Hill: Orphan is a mobile game developed by Gamefederation Studio and published by Konami. The game is set in an abandoned orphanage and is played through first-person, point-and-click gameplay. In order for the player to survive, a string of puzzles must be solved by using various items and clues. Orphan also unveils a new perspective on some past events that have occurred in the town. The sequel, Orphan 2, was released in September 2008, and the Orphan 3 in March 2010.

There are many references to stuttering in popular culture. Because of the unusual-sounding speech that is produced, as well as the behaviors and attitudes that accompany a stutter, stuttering has been a subject of scientific interest, curiosity, discrimination, and ridicule.

Fluency refers to continuity, smoothness, rate, and effort in speech production. It is also used to characterize language production, language ability or language proficiency.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Childhelp</span> American non-profit working to prevent and treat child abuse

Childhelp is a US non-profit organization dedicated to the prevention and treatment of child abuse. Founded in 1959 as International Orphans, Inc. by Sara O'Meara and Yvonne Fedderson, Childhelp is one of the largest non-profit child abuse prevention and treatment organizations in the nation. It operates facilities in California, Virginia, Tennessee, and Arizona. The Childhelp National Child Abuse Hotline services all of the United States, its territories and Canada. The organization also distributes Childhelp Speak Up Be Safe, a school-based abuse and bullying prevention program.

Stuttering therapy is any of the various treatment methods that attempt to reduce stuttering to some degree in an individual. Stuttering can be seen as a challenge to treat because there is a lack of consensus about therapy.

Charles Gage Van Riper was a renowned speech therapist who became internationally known as a pioneer in the development of speech pathology. A severe stutterer throughout his career, he is described as having had the most influence of any speech-language pathologist in the field of stuttering.

Speech and language impairment are basic categories that might be drawn in issues of communication involve hearing, speech, language, and fluency.

Einer Boberg was a Danish-Canadian speech pathologist who specialized in the study of stuttering and its treatment. From 1971 to 1995, he was a Professor of Speech Pathology in the Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine at the University of Alberta, in Edmonton Canada. In 1986, together with Deborah Kully, he founded the Institute for Stuttering Treatment and Research (ISTAR). He was particularly known for his advocacy of post-treatment maintenance of fluency, including the benefits of self-help groups. In 1991, he became the first President of the International Fluency Association.

The little Danes experiment, also known simply as the experiment, was a 1951 Danish operation where 22 Greenlandic Inuit children were sent to Danish foster families in an attempt to re-educate them as "little Danes". While the children were all supposed to be orphans, most were not. Six children were adopted while in Denmark, and sixteen returned to Greenland, only to be placed in Danish-speaking orphanages and never live with their families again. Half of the children experienced mental health disturbances, and half of them died in young adulthood. The government of Denmark officially apologised in 2020, after several years of demands from Greenlandic officials.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stuttering pride</span> Social movement

Stuttering pride is a social movement that repositions stuttering as a valuable and respectable way of speaking. The stuttering pride movement challenges the pervasive societal narrative of stuttering as a defect, repositioning stuttering as a form of vocal and linguistic diversity that enriches our language, ideas, and art forms.

References

  1. ↑ Tudor, Mary (1939). An Experimental Study of the Effect of Evaluative Labeling of Speech Fluency. University of Iowa. doi:10.17077/etd.9z9lxfgn.
  2. ↑ Alexander, Linda (Winter 1993). Carol Harker (ed.). "Campus Character: Figure of Speech". Iowa Alumni Quarterly. UI Alumni Association, University of Iowa. p. 41. Archived from the original on 2012-10-16. Retrieved 2012-08-23.
  3. ↑ Dyer, Jim. "Ethic and Orphans: 'The Monster Study'". Mercury News . Archived from the original on 27 September 2011. Retrieved 19 September 2011.
  4. 1 2 3 Reynolds, Gretchen (16 March 2003). "The Stuttering Doctor's 'Monster Study'". The New York Times . Retrieved 25 September 2011.
  5. ↑ "Huge payout in US stuttering case". news.bbc.co.uk. BBC News. 17 August 2007. Retrieved January 11, 2024.
  6. ↑ Johnson, Nicholas (13 December 2002). Retroactive Ethical Judgments & Human Subjects Research. Symposium on Ethics & the Tudor Study, Graduate Center, CUNY. Archived from the original on 2013-01-22. Retrieved 2012-08-23.
  7. ↑ "Stuttering case is settled". Los Angeles Daily News (August 29, 2017 ed.). August 19, 2007. Retrieved January 11, 2024.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.