In my opinion: Yes, I remember how I created a story to justify feared words (and situations), like "*it's always possible that I can stutter on the /P/, /A/ sounds, or when I sing*". In other words, this doubt is only a story. So when I give in to the story, I'm only encouraging more doubt. In this situation, a loss of control didn't cause a story of feared words (or situations), rather the story of doubt caused me to feel a loss of control, and rely on it. I argue that I stutter on a feared letter, because I convince myself with a story (instead of a sequence of events). Suppose I pick up a pen and try to convince you the pen is really a secret camera. I could just state this pen is a camera and discuss the make and type of camera. This statement on its own might not be too convincing. But suppose I relate a story about it being built in the same factory as James Bond’s special car. How the developer won a prize for his work. It was tested in field trials in different situations. Finally it was patented and is now in general use as a spy pen. The richer the scenery and the descriptive detail, the more it is lived in. Also there is feeling of being immersed in the story and the detachment from everyday life, which allows the imagination free rein. In this way I make the feared letter more vivid, personal and meaningful. The story can be so convincing that I actually begin to experience the story of a feared word (or situation) ‘as if’ it was real.