All participants discussed relationships between increases in stuttering and cues including specific sounds, words, situations, or past experiences of stuttering. Recent experimental investigations have yielded empirical support regarding the predictability of stuttering. In recent studies, participants read through systematically altered stimuli, created in attempts to potentially elicit moments of stuttering (Bowers et al., 2012; Jackson et al., 2020). These lines of research have repeatedly demonstrated how many people who stutter are adept in reporting the words and sounds on which they might stutter. It is fruitful to conceptualize perceived judgment as an experiential continuum. In this way, one can visualize myriad communication contexts, each with varying levels of meaningfulness and implicit communicative pressures (e.g., words, phrases, linguistic registers, listener attributes, social expectations). Within this continuum, situations felt by speakers to be low-stakes (i.e., involving little to no perceived judgment) can be seen on one end. In contexts with greater propositionality, conversational turns often include words and phrases encoding greater meaning (e.g., highly specific, novel information) or particular social expectations rarely involved in daily communication routines that are somewhat rote by comparison.  The significance of personal factors can be reflected in the importance that a person places upon constructs such as their appearance, competence, social aptitude and social desirability (Horberg & Chen, 2010; Twenge & Im, 2007; Venaglia & Lemay, 2017). Bearing these findings in mind, conceptualizing heightened perceived judgment as an increased need for social approval associates its occurrence with situations where speakers aim to save face with listeners.  As reported in Jackson et al. (2021), people who stutter encounter little to no stuttering when engaging in a context where the monitoring system is less likely to interact with ongoing motor behavior due to a lack of social consequences (e.g., whilst talking to oneself). Conversely, when an individual experiences perceived judgment, the monitoring system is more likely to interact with the ongoing planning and execution processes of the speech motor system. In combination, these findings have allowed us to speculate that there may be a relationship between the reduction in stuttering whilst **swearing** and perceived judgment. Swearing itself can be conceptualized as a micro act of rebellion that challenges otherwise predetermined expectations of how one can express themselves (i.e., communicate). From a sociolinguistic perspective, swearing has been documented as a natural outcropping of speakers’ decreased concerns for approval (e.g., social or otherwise), elevated levels of comfort or familiarity with listeners, and desires to convey their emotions (Bowers & Pleydell-Pearce, 2011; Moore, 2012). In the current study, the decrease of stuttering reported during heightened emotional states may be representative of similar phenomena, providing an additional glimpse into how strong desires to express emotions can overshadow concerns of perceived judgment. While gross neural structures are relatively stable, overt stuttering itself is not consistent and can vary greatly across contexts. Context is something dynamic, emerging from various factors that interact with the speaker as they engage in communicative acts. This intricate representation of context not only captures the physical environments in which a speaker may find themselves, but also includes situations (e.g., communication contexts), timescales (e.g., moment-to-moment, week-to-week) and internal experiences (e.g., physical and emotional wellness, states of mind). As such, personal beliefs about stuttering can be expected to vary widely across individuals and continue to evolve through time. These research results can help researchers investigate contextual variability through the manipulation of novel variables.