Hi! I would say that at this point in time, my approach to pseudostuttering is based more in ignorance than any particular bias, ha. My general opinion of pseudostuttering depends on whether it is being used for disability simulation or for stuttering therapy. For the former, I was surprised to learn that pseudostuttering is a common project given to student clinicians to better understand how individuals who stutter might feel and learn secondary behaviors e.g. avoidance. Because all you need to know about what it's like to live with a stutter is to pretend you stutter in three different scenarios over a course of a single week, right? Never mind the positive adaptations and perspectives of stuttering that can develop over the course of years. So I find disability simulation \*\*that centers the non-disabled person & prioritizes their life experience as "normal" or "better"\*\* to be incredibly insulting, insensitive, and a poor source of education (Not to mention that this situation does not allow room for the idea of student clinicians who DO stutter). I would much rather hear from many individuals who actually stutter to understand a wide range of impact and experience. For the latter, I understand that pseudostuttering is practiced by both the client and the clinician for primarily stuttering acceptance. I'm currently not familiar with the evidence or lack thereof regarding efficacy. nb: I am aware of the use of disability simulation for therapeutic purposes. For example, if someone will eventually lose their vision due to a progressive disease, it could be beneficial for them to simulate varying degrees of vision loss so as to prepare them for later stages. I most certainly do not object to that. What are your thoughts on pseudostuttering?