Private Speech
Private speech is speech that is not addressed towards anyone other than the speaker. There are two forms of private speech: overt and covert. Overt private speech is expressed out loud, whereas covert private speech is expressed inside the mind and not spoken aloud. In the past, researchers have used numerous terms to describe private speech, including egocentric speech, self-talk, self statements, and self-directed speech. For the purpose of the present research study, we will only concentrate on overt or out loud private speech.
The existing research literature on private speech has been limited in both scope and consistency. Although a large amount of research has been done on private speech, the majority of these studies have examined the occurrence of private speech in early childhood (De Dios, & Montero, 2001; Fernyhough, & Russell, 1997; Dougherty, White, & Manning, 1995; Winsler & Naglieri, 2003; Winsler, Carlton, & Barry, 2000; Berk, 1986; Kraft, & Berk, 1998; Matuga, 2003). Only a small number of studies have focused on the continuity of this phenomenon through adolescence and adulthood (Calvete & CaldeÃ?±oso, 2002; Duncan & Cheyne, 1999; Duncan & Cheyne, 2002; Hardy, Hall, & Hardy, 2005; Kronk, 1994; Miyake, 2002; Schooler, 2004). In addition to this disparity in the literature, there have been conflicting findings regarding the influence of task difficulty on private speech, as well as the effect of private speech on task performance (Berk & Landau, 1993; Berk, 1998; Chiu & Alexander, 2000; De Dios & Montero, 2001; Duncan & Pratt, 1997; Fernyhough & Fradley, 2005; Matuga, 2003; Winsler, Diaz, &Montero, 1997). Due to the limitations and conflicting nature of the previous studies on private speech, the present study will attempt to examine the private speech of adolescents and adults, particularly college students’ private speech and how task difficulty influences the usage of private speech. The hypothesis of the present study is that college students will use a greater amount of private speech during more difficult tasks as opposed to easier tasks.
Brief History
The first examination of private speech began in the 1920s with Piaget’s interest in early childhood development. He used the term “egocentric speech” to describe the private speech that occur in children beginning at the age of 2 and disappearing by the end of age 4 (Hetherington, 2003). Piaget labeled this form of private speech “egocentric” for two reasons (Hetherington, 2003). First of all, Piaget believed that children go through an egocentric stage between the ages of 2 and 4, wherein, they view the world from their own perspective and often fail to understand other people’s perspective. It is during the egocentric stage that children start to use private speech, hence the name “egocentric speech.” According to Piaget, the private speech of 2-4 year olds is also egocentric in that, by using it, the children are not attempting to make their private speech understandable to others). Although Piaget believed that private speech contributes to normal child development (Piaget, 1971), he believed that it does not serve any important cognitive functions (Hetherington, 2003).
In contrast to Piaget’s findings, Vygotsky believed that private speech or egocentric speech has several important cognitive functions. He defined private speech as a mechanism through which one communicates with oneself for the purpose of self-regulation (Vygotsky, 1962). He thought that private speech played a role in guiding one’s thoughts, planning one’s behavior, and solving problems. Like Piaget, Vygotsky believed that children begin to use private speech by the age of 2 (Hetherington, 2003). Unlike Piaget, however, he believed that private speech does not disappear with increasing age; instead, private speech becomes internalized gradually by the age of 7 or 8 (Hetherington, 2003).
Mead (1934) saw private speech as a necessity in the social aspect of child development. Mead found that most normal and healthy children’s private speech decreased with age and virtually disappeared by the age of 10. As for people with emotional and psychiatric disorders, the occurrence of private speech varies. Because these people are already suffering from developmental disabilities, it would not be unusual for them to talk to themselves (as cited in Glenn & Cunningham, 2000).
In contrast to Mead’s research (1934) which examined private speech in healthy children, several researchers investigated the relationship between mental health and private speech. Glenn and Cunningham (2000) investigated private speech in children with Down’s Syndrome. They found that Down’s Syndrome adolescents with the intelligence level of a 5-7 year old talked to themselves, both privately and publicly. However, the Down’s Syndrome subjects who had a mental age higher than 5 and 7, reported using private speech in the past, but no longer doing so. Treadwell and Kendall (1996) reported that children with anxiety disorders had more negative and anxious self statements than other children. It was also found that the negative self statements of children with anxiety disorders were predictive of their anxiety level following treatment. In other words, as children with anxiety disorders reduce their negative self statements, they are decreasing their anxiety levels as well.
Other researchers have focused on the relationship between behavioral problems, like ADHD, and private speech. It was found that children with ADHD use more task relevant private speech than do normally achieving children. Children with ADHD also internalize their overt private speech into whispers and lower voice utterances at a later age than normally achieving children (Berk & Landau, 1993; Kopecky, 2005; Winsler, 1998). Another study reported that 3-year old children who are at high risk for behavioral problems, such as ODD and CD, evidenced a greater usage of private speech in all the tasks administered in the study (Winsler, Diaz, Atencio, McCarthy, & Chabay, 2000). At the same time, compared to children who are not at risk for behavioral problems, the at-risk children used task-relevant speech more often while completing the tasks (Winsler et al., 1999/2000).
The Uses of Private Speech
Much research has been done after Piaget and Vygotsky, most of which have focused on children’s private speech. Some researchers have focused on the motivational aspects of it in relation to task performance (Chiu & Alexander, 2000; Fernyhough & Fradley, 2005; Duncan & Cheyne, 1999), while others have supported Vygotsky’s theory of the self-regulating and thought developmental functions of private speech (De Dios & Montero, 2001; Dougherty, M., White, C.S., Manning, B.H., 1995; Matuga, 2003).
Distinguishing One’s Speech from Others’ Speech
One of the most interesting uses for private speech is that it allows a person to distinguish his own speech from those of others while being in a social context (Fernyhough & Russell, 1997). In this same study, they reported that children who used private speech to a larger extent during free play were more likely to recognize their voice in a social context. The children were given three tasks to complete: The first task consisted of the children engaging in free play with minimal adult interference while being videotaped; the videotapes were later coded for private speech, which was defined as any lip movements wherein the child was not responding to anyone, nor anticipating a response, or engaging in eye or tactile contact with another person. The second task required the children to discuss, as a group, about what activity Charlie the Crocodile, a toy character, should do for his birthday. The discussion was audio taped and divided into voice segments, with each segment capturing the voice of each child. One week after these two tasks were administered, the children met with the researchers one more time in order to complete the third task. In the third task, the children were assessed in their ability to distinguish his or her voice from another child’s voice. The children listened to two voice segments, which were previously recorded during the second task, and were asked to state which voice segment contained their voice. The results showed that the children who used the most private speech in their free play were more likely to correctly identify the voice segment that contained their voice.
Private Speech as a Motivational Mechanism
Private speech is a motivational mechanism for school children and adults alike. In their study of preschool children, Chiu and Alexander (2000) examined private speech and mastery motivation (a person’s persistence or desire to achieve a goal independently), and the relationship between them. To examine these variables, the researchers instructed the subjects to each complete three tasks: a puzzle, fishing task, and jumping task. The results showed that although the children’s use of private speech remained consistent in frequency across all the tasks, their mastery motivation varied among the tasks. For example, although a child may choose to work independently without any adult assistance on the fishing task, he may ask for help on another task like the puzzle task. The researchers also found a relationship between private speech and mastery motivation, although the relationship is a moderate one. In other words, the children’s persistence in completing a task is relatively related to the proportion of private speech they used in completing the task.
In addition to Chiu and Alexander (2000) who studied the motivational function of private speech among preschool children, Hardy, Hall, and Hardy (2005) studied the same concept but with adult athletes. They found that it was common for adult athletes to use private speech in order to mentally prepare themselves for competitions and practices. By using private speech, athletes are able to verbally motivate themselves to perform well, which is also known as “psyching up” (Hardy, Hall, & Hardy, 2005). At the same time, private speech also serves as a relaxation mechanism for these athletes, particularly for calming them down after a competition or practice.
Private Speech as a Self-Regulation Mechanism
Other than serving as a mechanism by which one distinguishes his speech from those of others and as a motivational mechanism, private speech has largely been used for self-regulation. Self-regulation is the process by which one thinks about and takes action towards goals. The self-regulatory functions of private speech include planning, recall, guidance, and task switching. Each of these functions plays a crucial role in helping a person achieve or complete a particular goal or task.
People use private speech as a means of problem solving, especially for planning, guiding one’s thoughts, recall, and task switching. In Berk’s study (1986), she observed that first and third-graders used private speech to guide their thoughts while solving difficult math problems. One study found that after being previously scaffold by an adult on a collaborative task, a large majority of the subjects (3-5 year old children) used private speech to prepare for and guide themselves on the upcoming independent task (Winsler, Diaz, & Montero, 1997). The 5-17-year old subjects in Winsler and Naglieri’s study (2003) used private speech to plan and arrive at their answers on a matching task. Similarly, Duncan and Pratt’s 4-6-year old subjects used private speech to plan their paper-folding and story-sequencing tasks (1997). Matuga (2003/2004), on the other hand, observed that the first-, third-, and fifth-graders used private speech as a planning strategy before undertaking their drawing tasks. Recall is another function of private speech that people use to retrieve information from their memory. Lane and Schooler (2004) reported that undergraduates who were instructed to use private speech during an analogical retrieval task were able to recall more information out of their memory than those who were not given the same instruction.
Emerson & Miyake (2003) took a different approach from other researchers and examined how task switching and performance are affected when private speech is hindered. The subjects of this study, who were 42 undergraduates, were given arithmetic problems that required them to switch between addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. The subjects were divided into three groups, with each group receiving different instructions for solving the arithmetic problems. The articulatory suppression group was instructed to recite the phrase “a-b-c” every time they were prompted to, while solving their math problems. The foot-tapping group was instructed to tap one foot every time they were prompted to, while also solving the math problems. The control group was not given any special instructions for completing the math problems. The results suggest that compared to the control group, the articulatory suppression and foot tapping groups significantly increased their task-switching time, with articulatory suppression having the most detrimental effect on task-switching time. At the same time, these results point to the positive effects of private speech on task switching and how its hinderance can negatively affect task-switching time.
Other Uses for Private Speech
Besides serving as self-regulatory functions, private speech also has other important uses. Fields (2002) found that private speech is necessary for the maintenance of one’s own privacy as well as to keep the mind working properly. Private speech can also be an indicator of low self-esteem. Thomas Brinthaupt, an assistant professor at Middle Tennessee State University, found that people who suffered from low self-esteem spent more time discussing what they had answered on a test than those with higher self esteem, who said more positive and congratulatory self statements (Cauchon, 1994).
Because private speech serves the purpose of guiding one’s thought process and actions (as cited in Chiu & Alexander, 2000), many therapists use self-talk in cognitive behavioral therapy. Harvill (1984) started to use private speech in the form of positive self-statements in the cognitive behavioral treatment of a 16 year old bulimic girl to eliminate binging and purging (1984). Harvill (1984) directed the girl to recite certain positive statements about herself every time she binged over a 4 month period. Harvill (1984) found that the frequency and incidents of purging after binging decreased due to the positive self-statements. The positive self statements were effective because it reduced the girl’s anxiety about purging after a binging episode, and also reduced the opportunity for irrational thoughts or negative statements.
Private Speech, the Nature of the Task, and Task Performance
People seem to use private speech to different extents depending on situational factors. Numerous studies suggest that the use of private speech is connected to the nature of the assigned task, particularly the difficulty level and objectives underlying the particular task (Chiu & Alexander, 2000; Duncan & Pratt, 1997; Emerson & Miyake, 2002; Fernyhough & Fradley, 2005; Hardy, Hardy, & Hall, 2005; Lane & Schooler, 2004; Winsler, Carlton, & Barry, 2000; Winsler, Diaz, & Montero, 1997). One’s usage of private speech during the task has also been linked to his performance on that particular task (Lane & Schooler, 2004; Winsler & Naglieri, 2003). There are also claims which support that an individual’s age, creativity, and intelligence influence one’s usage of private speech during an assigned task (Berk, 1986; Duncan & Cheyne, 2002; Krafft & Berk, 1998; Matuga, 2003; Matuga, 2004; Winsler et al., 1997; Winsler et al., 2000; Winsler & Naglieri, 2003).
The objectives surrounding a task affect the nature and amount of private speech a person uses. Chiu and Alexander (2000) found out that tasks of similar nature often resulted in a consistent amount of private speech across those tasks. It was also reported that tasks which require creativity, are self-selected (where one picks the activity), and have no specific goals often elicit more private speech, than tasks which have specific goals (Krafft & Berk, 1998; Matuga, 2003; Matuga, 2004; Winsler et al., 2000).
Private Speech and Task Difficulty
One study reported a quadratic relationship between the amount of private speech used and task difficulty, whereby greater private speech was displayed during tasks of medium difficulty as opposed to easy or difficult tasks (Fernyhough & Fradley, 2005). In this study of forty-six 5-6 year olds, each of the subjects worked on the Tower of London tasks (ToL) in three difficulty levels: easy, medium, and difficult. The ToL tasks required the subjects to move three colored balls along a wooden base into three pegs of different lengths. The subjects could only move one colored ball at a time. The objective of the ToL tasks was to attempt to move and arrange the three colored balls into a particular configuration. The most difficult configurations required 4-5 moves, the medium-difficulty configurations required 3 moves, while the easiest configurations required 2-3 moves. While the children were working on the ToL tasks, their usage of private speech was observed by an adult experimenter. The results showed that among all the configurations, the children used the greatest amount of private speech on the medium-difficulty configurations, and the least amount of private speech on the easy and difficult configurations.
Duncan and Pratt’s (1997) finding were exactly the opposite of Fernyhough & Fradley’s (2005) findings, supporting that children utilized greater private speech on difficult and novel tasks compared to easy and familiar tasks. In this study, each of the forty 4-6 year old subjects worked on two types of tasks: paper-folding and story-sequencing tasks. The study included three 20- to 30- minute sessions with each subject. Each session consisted of practice items (items that the subjects practiced with an experimenter) followed by experimental independent items (items that the subjects worked on independently without the experimenter’s help). The first session included 2 practice items of each task type (story-sequencing and paper-folding), and 4 independent items of each type, with half of them being easy and the other half difficult. In the second session, each subject worked on 2 practice items of each task type and 4 independent items of each type; for each task type, 2 independent items were familiar to the subject from the first session, and the other 2 were novel. In the third session, subjects worked on 2 practice items of each type and 4 independent items of each type; for each task type, 2 independent items were familiar to the subject from the previous sessions, and the other 2 were novel. The results showed that the usage of private speech was greatest preceding and during novel and difficult tasks, as opposed to easy and familiar tasks.
Private Speech and Task Performance
Several relationships between private speech and task performance have been found. One’s usage of private speech during the task has also been linked to his performance on problem-solving tasks (Lane & Schooler, 2004; Winsler & Naglieri, 2003). The usage of private speech has been linked to enhanced athletic performance, particularly in sports such as soccer, volleyball, and water polo (Hatzigeorgiadis, Theodorakis, & Zoubanos, 2004; Johnson, Hrycaiko, Dennis, Johnson, & Halas, 2004; Papaioannou, Ballon, Theodorakis, & Yves Vanden, 2004). One study found that preschool children’s puzzle-solving performance was enhanced because of their usage of private speech during the task (Goodman, 1981). The results showed that the puzzles that were completed with the aid of private speech were more proficient, and were completed in a shorter length of time, as opposed to puzzles completed without the use of private speech (Goodman, 1981).
Private Speech, Age, Creativity, and Intelligence
Private Speech and Age
Age seems to contribute to one’s use of private speech. A number of studies have supported Vygosky’s theory that overt private speech decreases with age and becomes internalized (Berk, 1997; Krafft & Berk, 1998; Winsler et al., 1997). In one study, 4-year olds used private speech more selectively than 3-year olds (Winsler et al, 2000). In the same study, the researchers found that 4-year olds’ private speech was more likely to occur during sustained and focused goal-oriented activity as opposed to rapidly changing non-goal directed activity. Another study found that among 3-, 3.5-, 4-, and 4.5- year olds, the 3-year olds and 4.5-year olds (the youngest and oldest age groups in this study) used the least amount of item-relevant private speech (Winsler et al., 1997). Matuga (2003) acquired the same age-related trend for her study with 7 to 11-year olds, wherein the 7 and 11-year olds used the least amount of private speech.
Private Speech, Creativity, and Intelligence
Several researchers have linked creativity and intelligence to private speech. Matuga (2004) was able to find an association between creativity and private speech, contending that children with higher creative abilities used less private speech when planning their drawings, compared to children with average or low creative abilities. A link between intelligence and private speech was also proposed by Berk (1986), claiming that the use of private speech varies depending on IQ. She found that first graders who had high IQ’s were less likely to use task-relevant private speech, yet more likely to have inaudible mutterings and higher achievement. However, for first-graders of average and below-average IQ, no relationships were found between their IQ, use of task-relevant private speech, and score on the math problem-solving tasks. Berk also found that third graders with high IQs used less task-relevant private speech, and that their performance on the math problems is not related to their use of private speech. For third graders of average IQs, the more they used task-irrelevant private speech, the lower their performance on the math measure.
Social Influences on the Usage of Private Speech
The social context that people find themselves in influences the extent to which they use private speech. The presence and absence of others determines whether or not a person uses private speech, and also how much a person uses it when he does use it. There are also members of society that influence how and how much people use private speech, which include parents, siblings, teachers, and peers.
The social environment that one is in plays a role in one’s usage of private speech. There have been numerous studies supporting that the presence of other people results in a decline in one’s private speech (Berk & Garvin, 1984; Kronk, 1994; Winsler et al., 2000). When adults are not around anyone else, they may speak to themselves more freely. However, when others are around, adults reduce or even eliminate their use of private speech for fear of social disapproval (Kronk, 1994). The association between private speech and mental illness contributes to the declining use of private speech among adolescents and adults (as cited in Glenn & Cunningham, 2000). Furthermore, in our culture, private speech is often seen as a sign of immaturity and loneliness (as cited in Glenn & Cunningham, 2000). Winsler, Carlton, and Barry (2000) found that 3 and 4-year olds were most likely to use private speech when alone, next likely in the presence of their peers, and least likely in the presence of their teachers. On the other hand, when permitted and urged to use private speech, a majority of people use private speech (Fernyhough & Diaz, 2005). Fernyhough and Diaz (2005) found that ninety-eight percent of the subjects in their study used private speech while taking a test when told that it was okay to do so. This study demonstrates that when the social pressure is removed, one can freely use private speech.
One’s usage of private speech is also influenced by one’s parents and siblings. Maternal parenting style has been linked with a child’s usage of private speech (Berk & Spuhl, 1995). Berk and Spuhl (1995) reported that 4-year olds who have authoritative mothers used more task-relevant private speech and less inaudible muttering; whereas, 5-year olds who have more authoritarian and permissive mothers used greater task-irrelevant private speech. In another study, the interaction between mothers and their preschool children, who are at risk for behavioral problems, were examined (Winsler, Diaz, McCarthy, Atencio, & Chabay, 1999). The researchers indicated that the interaction between these two groups of people were characterized by more negative control, less praise, and less physical withdrawal in comparison to the interaction between preschool children who are not at risk and their mothers (Winsler et al., 1999). Burnett (1996), on the other hand, was able to link the positive and negative statements of parents and siblings to children’s positive and negative self statements. He found that the presence of positive statements by parents and the low rate of negative statements by parents were contributors to positive self-talk for boys, but not for girls. Negative statements made by siblings also appeared to be related to negative self-talk for both boys and girls (Burnett, 1996).
Teachers and peers both play a role in a child’s usage of private speech. Frauenglass and Diaz (1985) found that most teachers discourage students from using private speech. Deniz (2004), on the other hand, reported that most teachers occasionally encourage children’s private speech in the classroom; however, the teachers would discourage private speech only in instances where a student’s private speech is disruptive to the teachers, themselves, or other students. A study done by Burnett (1999/2003) found that teacher’s positive statements toward students were directly related to the students’ positive self talk and to math and learning self-concepts. In this way, the teachers’ positive statements gave the students a higher sense of self which resulted in their greater usage of positive self talk. On the other hand, negative statements made by teachers were predictive of math self-concept for girls and negative self-talk for boys. In an earlier study Burnett (1996) found that if a student is seen as a misbehaved child by his peers and teachers, he is more likely to have negative self talk than the other students. At the same time, positive statements made by peers were related to positive self-talk for both boys and girls. In the same token, peers’ negative statements were often linked to negative self statements for boys and girls as well.
Hypothesis:
Ho: College students engage in private speech moreso in difficult tasks as opposed to easier tasks.
H1: College students do not engage in private speech moreso in difficult tasks as opposed to easier tasks.
Method
Subjects:
We plan to obtain a sample of x students from the General Psychology Classes. This sample will be from a random psychology student pool, generated by a computer program. The participants will receive credit towards their general psychology classes. The age range of the participants is (x-x), with (x) being males and (x) being females.
Procedure:
Once the participants arrive in the testing room, they will be given informed consent forms to sign and a brief explanation of the purpose of our study. We will also give the participants information on self-talk in order to urge them to give honest answers, without feeling ashamed of their private speech usage. We will also ask them to try to use all points of the scale while rating the items. We will then distribute a revised, more task relevant version of the Self-Verbalization Questionnaire (SVQ) (as cited in Duncan & Cheyne, 1999). The SVQ is a self-report instrument which comprises 22 items, and assesses a person’s use of private speech in relation to a task. There will be two scales attached to each item in the questionnaire: One will be a 6-point Likert Scale rating to what extent the participant agrees or disagrees with the item; the other scale will consist of only two choices: easy or difficult. This way we can correlate how difficult the task is for that particular participant and to what extent he/she uses private speech while performing that particular task.
Finally, we will randomly distribute an additional page to the questionnaire, wherein half of the participants will be asked to describe a difficult task in which they frequently used private speech (control group), and the other half will be asked to describe any task in which they frequently used private speech (experimental group). Since the hypothesis of the present study is that college students will use greater private speech in difficult situations, we are hoping that the majority of the people in the experimental group will describe a difficult task, as opposed to an easier task.
Chiu, S., & Alexander, P.A. (2000). The Motivational Function of Preschoolers’ Private Speech. Discourse Processes, 30(2), 133-152. Duncan, R.M., & Cheyne, J. A. (1999). Incidence and functions of self-reported private speech in young adults: a self verbalization questionnaire. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 31, 133-136. Fernyhough, C., & Fradley, E. (2005). Private speech on an executive task: Relations with task difficulty and task performance. Cognitive Development, 20, 103-120. Fernyhough, C., & Russell, J. (1997). Distinguishing One’s Own Voice from Those of Other’s :A Function for Private Speech? International Journal of Behavioral Development, 20 (4),651-665. Winsler, A., Diaz, R.M., & Montero, I. (1997). The Role of Private in the Transition From Collaborative to Independent Task Performance in Young Children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 59-79.
