Susanne Gahl ^*

• University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States

In the published article, there was a series of errors, consequent to aspects of the design of the ECLS-6 K:2011 that the author overlooked and/or that were not noted in the documentation: (1) Starting in the third 7 grade round of data collection, there was a definition of stuttering available to interview field staff; (2) also 8 starting in the third grade round of data collection, the question about stuttering was reworded so as to 9 restrict the temporal scope to the immediately preceding year; (3) there were constraints on which parents 10 were asked about stuttering following the Kindergarten round of data collection. A correction has been made to Introduction, Paragraph Number 7. This sentence previously stated: No clarification was provided in the ECLS survey process as to whether the word "stuttering" in 13 the ECLS was intended as the name of a disorder. The corrected sentence appears below: No clarification was included in the question as to whether the word "stuttering" in the ECLS 16 was intended as the name of a disorder. Starting in the third-grade round of data collection, a 17 'help text' was available for interviewers to read to parents upon request. The help text read "A 18 Stuttering problem refers to difficulty producing fluent (flowing or effortless) speech. The child cannot 19 speak sentences or groups of words with ease. Instead, the child hesitates before saying some words. They may seem as if they are mentally blocking on a word. This hesitation makes it hard for the 21 listener to understand what the child is trying to say." That explanation falls short in several respects: Most children who stutter produce sentences or groups of words with ease some of the time. Most 23 importantly, the help text fails to differentiate stuttering from normal disfluencies, tip-of-the-tongue 24 states, or other speech hesitations not due to stuttering, and it falsely implies that symptoms of 25 stuttering generally impede intelligibility. The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the 27 article in any way. The original article has been updated.