What do you think? Does identifying ourselves as a severe stutterer, reinforce it? (Everyone, join the discussion)

What do you think? Does identifying ourselves as a severe stutterer, reinforce it? (Everyone, join the discussion) If children (or adults) constantly focus on obsessional doubt and possibility to fail (regarding their performance), or to receive negative reactions - and view this as a problem and to be avoided. Then whatever this performance entails, it may possibly turn into an actual health condition or disorder. Now: Compare this with stuttering. I think, if we constantly focus on obsessional doubt and possibility **to stutter**. Then incipient stuttering that might not be sufficiently noticeable, can turn into developed (aka severe) stuttering. Then the primary question we should ask ourselves, is.. **question**: Does identifying ourselves as a severe stutterer (or labeling incipient stuttering as an actual stutter disorder) reinforce a mindset that stuttering is 'always' looming around the corner (just waiting to resurface), and thus, reinforcing this obsessional doubt and possibility to stutter? # What do you think? Does identifying ourselves as a severe stutterer result in: * reinforcing negative expectations, and thus, it can lead to magnifying our stutter disorder, downplaying successes (even if we say a feared word fluently.. feeling like attaining freedom but without closure.. for example because we attribute it to 'luck' or 'the next time it might be stuttered' or global causes.. rather than addressing the internal locus of control), and magnifying communication failures * reinforcing the concept that we will always continue stuttering no matter what, and thus, it can lead to externalizing responsibility (or exhibiting an external locus of control) regarding the fine-tuning of the execution threshold, such as, we start labeling ‘scanning for threats or stuttering anticipation’ as new-information-seeking or reassurance-seeking, which actually tricks us into thinking it's helpful. But in reality, it leads to imagining more doubts by seeking information we already know, rather than grounding us in reality * reinforcing perceiving themselves to be abnormally error-prone, rather than accepting that their language and speech production capacity is mildly impaired * reinforcing information that aligns with their existing beliefs while ignoring positive beliefs / consequences / evidence / the bigger picture * reinforcing interpreting information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs, such as, using secondaries intensifies the impression of "getting stuck when saying our name" (or interpreting a tense unconfident voice as signs of potential relapse and it gives the impression of not being able to get the sound out) * reinforcing the belief that you don't play an active role in fine-tuning your execution threshold * dismissing the power of suggestion * dismissing the need for natural, spontaneous, effortless and normal, uncaring and subconscious speech production * discouraging subconscious fluency (over controlled speech, or over speech accuracy) * conforming to what is socially acceptable as a stutterer * underestimating our capacity to speak and overestimating the anxiety from social constructs * self-fulfilling Prophecy * alluding to the idea of stuttering “always being there” in some capacity \[enduring presence\], even when experiencing fluent speech, thereby amplifying anticipation of future stuttering occurrences * Resulting in Anticipatory Struggle: Believing that speech is difficult, and immersing themselves in a subconscious image of themselves as a stutterer: if the stuttering stops for a long enough time, it is as if the subconscious becomes ‘worried’; it receives a message that the status quo is changing. The subconscious then tries to restore the status quo by increasing base-level tension. This higher base-level tension has a twofold effect: renewed stuttering, plus a disruption of the newly acquired fluent behavior. As a result the stutterer resumes his stuttering and the subconscious is ‘reassured’ * Stutterers may find it difficult to really come to terms with his new fluency achieved. If we speak fluently, we likely think: "But this isn’t me!". Because our mind/body wants to subconsciously get back to that old (and 'safe') self-image of ourselves stuttering. Then the mind/body might use all the tricks there is, such as, physiological arousal, or bringing us further from reality and more into stutter problem land. Focusing on obsessional doubt and possibility to stutter - is based on a good story, not on sense information or a sequence of events; We make the trigger more vivid, personal and meaningful - resulting in making the sensation of loss of control more real or giving it more credibility. Viewing triggers (or speech errors in the speech plan) as real/powerful rather than for what they are (just meaningless passing thoughts or feelings) Again.. Does identifying ourselves as a severe stutterer reinforce a mindset that stuttering is 'always' looming around the corner, and thus, reinforcing this obsessional doubt and possibility to stutter? This answer might be yes for some people and no for others. Likely, 'yes' for most people who persist, I think. # What do you think? ​ >According to this research study: > >**"The biochemistry of belief"** > >Dopamine levels are linked to belief formation, as evidenced by research on paranormal thoughts. > >Beliefs play a crucial role in psychiatric disorders, with brain structures like the prefrontal cortex and limbic system implicated in threat assessment and self-defense mechanisms. > >Shifting perceptions and embracing new experiences can alter beliefs, thereby changing the body's biochemical responses favorably. > >Sensory information undergoes filtering through beliefs before reaching conscious awareness, affecting how we perceive and interact with the world. > >Placebos demonstrate the power of belief in altering physiological responses. An example includes a woman whose nausea was cured by a placebo due to the strong belief in the treatment's efficacy. > >Beliefs about disorders or treatments directly influence biological responses, exemplified by a schizophrenic woman whose belief in being diabetic altered her blood glucose levels. > >Beliefs shape physical well-being through biochemical processes. For instance, beliefs can influence immune responses and growth hormone levels in conditions like psychosocial dwarfism. > >Positive beliefs, such as those induced by placebos, can promote healing, whereas negative beliefs, termed 'nocebos,' can lead to adverse health outcomes. > >Your thoughts?