Yea, that's a good idea. Maybe a YT video playlist about stuttering onset/development regarding how a neutral stimulus turns into a conditioned stimulus (that elicits a conditioned response) aka a trigger for stuttering. >According to google: A neutral stimulus does not produce a specific or natural response in an organism. In other words, it does not trigger a conditioned reaction simply by being present. >**Classical conditioning process** >A neutral stimulus is repeatedly associated with an unconditioned stimulus to produce a conditioned response. >Process: >1. Acquisition phase: Neutral stimulus (such as, **anticipation of negative reactions)** is paired with the unconditioned stimulus (like, **perceiving disfluencies and viewing it as punishment**), which naturally produces a response in the organism (like, preventing execution of the speech plan resulting in **stuttering**). >2. Association phase: The organism begins to relate both stimuli and anticipate the conditioned response. >3. Extinction phase: If the neutral stimulus is presented repeatedly without the presence of the unconditioned stimulus, the association between the two weakens and the conditioned response decreases. *In Pavlov's experiment, if dogs heard the bell without receiving food, salivation died out over time.* Theoretically.. if "anticipation of negative reactions" (or other stuttering triggers) is no longer paired with "perceived punishment", then that specific trigger loop can die out and become extinct. In other words, stuttering is put into remission for that specific trigger loop. However. And here comes the "but". But, the challenge lies in "significant associations" that we hold on to (and attribute to the neutral stimulus).. take for example, if I continue perceiving that I will stutter - for whatever reason - then "the likelihood that stuttering returns, the probability of stuttering" is an association that keeps the trigger process alive and prevents its extinction. See it like this: 80% of children recover from stuttering, but if for some reason or other - these stuttering children hold on to those stutter remnants (referring to any association with stuttering), then.. I believe there is a higher chance that the trigger loop persists (and thus, the trigger loop is not put into remission/extinction). I mean, associations like "perceiving oneself as a stutterer or attributing stutter-free speech to 'luck' rather than recognizing it as a trigger-response mechanism". These significant associations basically interfere with the extinction process, I argue. Conclusion: So, I think that this concept deserves wider recognition, perhaps through online publications or a web series on YT?! Currently speech therapists and researchers seem to overlook this concept, which likely hinders progress in stutter research. By ignoring this concept, I think that research efforts are diverted to less impactful areas.. I'm sure you can resonate with the extremely high amount of insignificant stutter research that is out there.