>*"Bloodstein noticed that any novelty in speech production alleviates stuttering."* Yes I agree. I might be wrong, but from my own understanding.. if someone uses something new or for the first time, people will automatically naturally (unconditioned stimulus i.e., without prior learning) lean towards approach behaviors i.e., executing the speech plan (result/outcome: fluency). Of course this unconditioned response can be disrupted (I think primarily on a subconscious level or psychosocial level).. which may explain why speaking in a silly voice is not effective for everyone -including me. When someone uses a new technique (such as acting in a silly voice), perhaps this shifts attention away from automatic, stutter-prone behaviors or triggers?! Or, it reduces anticipatory anxiety and negative expectations tied to past stuttering experiences?! Anyway, here is a quote from Brocklehurst (Phd) about this: *"It is well known and well-documented by research that novel conditions generally promote a temporary experience of fluency in PWS. So, for example, if one starts to speak in an unusual way – with a different accent, different tone of voice, different loudness, different speed, any difference that is new is likely to promote increased fluency – thanks to the novelty effect. The same applies for learning a new technique, or going to see a new therapist. These are all novel experiences that trigger the orienting response and then also approach behaviour. Both the orienting response and approach behaviour (which is essentially an extension of the orienting response) are enabled by the phasic release of dopamine. This phasic release of dopamine essentially lowers the release threshold for the execution of motor commands, including speech motor commands, enabling us to act and to speak more easily. It’s important to understand that the new found fluency initially comes about simply because of the novelty effect, and not because the therapist or the technique are correct or good or helpful. It’s just novelty, and more often than not, and if a punishing stimulus then occurs that is strong enough to distract one’s attention away from the novelty, the older conditioned reflexes are likely to return, and the stuttering will come back.The novelty effect can open a window of opportunity for new learning (new conditioning). Whether or not that new learning takes place depends on a number of other factors, one of which is our understanding and interpretation of what is happening to us. Our cognitions are able to influence (and sometimes potentially override) our conditioning. Source:* [VRT summary](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wlQUzx-fzXh4KGxNKSq4g3e974YcYhkA/view?usp=sharing)*)"* Perhaps a novel technique, such as "acting in a different voice," leads humans to a natural inclination to lean toward a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy. As a result, they may be less inclined to reinforce critical internal judgments?! Anyway.. I quote Brocklehurst again: *"It seems to me that, once a person has started to perceive blocks as a problem, from that time onwards, anything that that person believes will cause them to block will indeed cause them to block - absolutely anything. And anything that they believe will stop them from blocking will stop from blocking."*