Perceptions and Experiences of Indian and Indian-American Multilingual and Multicultural Adults Who Stutter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate the intersectional identities of Indian and Indian American people who stutter and explore how their multicultural and/or multilingual identities contribute to their self-perceptions and experiences of disability. Method: Five Indian or Indian American adults (all male) who stuttered participated in a semi-structured interview via Zoom. Interview transcripts were analyzed using a phenomenological qualitative research methods process. The qualitative research process included in-vivo coding, identification of categories, and emergence of themes. Results: Participants reported both unique and shared experiences related to their stuttering and their multicultural and multilingual backgrounds. Four major themes from the interviews emerged: 1) Descriptions of Stuttering, 2) Multicultural/Multilingual variables related to Stuttering, 3) Community and Self-Perceptions of Stuttering, 4) and Stuttering Treatment. Conclusion: Qualitative results indicate that there was a lack of awareness around stuttering and disability in India, and a lack of access to treatment and resources for stuttering. Participants all reported that they held negative self-perceptions of their stutter due to family, friends, cultural and societal factors at some point in their lives. Most participants reported their current view of their stuttering is neutral to positive.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".