Basically, this threshold mechanism (based on distorted beliefs) - allows/prevents the release of speech motor plans. It's a defensive mechanism e.g., if we feel the need to speak more perfect or error-free (cognitive distortion: perfectionsim), then the defensive mechanism will activate quicker resulting in stuttering. But, if this is true, then it's important to ask.. **Question**: Is this defensive mechanism a form of proactive or reactive inhibitory control? Reactive referring to a response after the 'stutter trigger' is encountered, like using behavioral techniques. Proactive referring to a response before the 'stutter trigger' is encountered, like avoiding a situation or always using a technique (in all situations) before one even experiences a trigger. **In my opinion:** I hypothesize that this defensive mechanism (that results in stuttering) is actually both reactive and proactive. Some PWS use it more proactively, and others more reactively - which might help explain why some stutterers even stutter when they are alone. So, to make it more clear what I'm trying to convey. I think that there is a 'component' in this defensive mechanism that is at least somewhat voluntary, which is * (1) justifying factors (that 'justify' allowing or preventing the release of speech plans), and * (2) choosing to implement 'the need to reduce' factors (like triggers or perceived threat or whatever) So, in conclusion, I argue that these two components can be a form of proactive or reactive inhibitory control. (*can we now throw away all the research studies about stuttering since this is the core of what causes recovery or persistence? jk*) Your thoughts?