Actually, that answer of yours made me think of a follow-up question - it's already been touched briefly in the main thread, but I thought I'd dig a little deeper: - We often have this way of talking about therapy in general where the efficacy can be better or worse, depending on the interaction between therapist and client, but also depending on the therapy approach - or at least, the latter must be an assumption that we include, since not all therapists are doing the same thing. So, for stutter specifically, it might be relevant - equally relevant to any other therapy field, of course - to identify which theory bases have the best chance of being a good match for any given stutterer (client, as it were). I guess what I'm asking is, could we somehow track how the delivery of certain models of understanding inherent in various approaches to stuttering _specifically_ could be found in general better than some other approaches? Perhaps it seems like a weird sort of backwards or sideways manner with which to determine what ought to be said to stutterers, outside of what could be said strictly scientifically... but I'm looking at this from the perspective of a stutterer who conceivably just needs the safest route possible to get a handle on their condition, and the impact our choice of communication content might have. - Did that make sense to you? It's a bit "tangled", I know. :)