In the end of the day, anticipation is simply an **intrusive** \[thought, body sensation or feeling\] (such as, an anticipatory pressure in the throat, which most people in [this poll ](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stutter/comments/18wyovf/do_you_often_feel_or_know_that_you_will_stutter/)experience), or they just 'know' that stuttering might happen \[anticipatory thought\]. If I'm alone (where I normally don't stutter) and I would convince myself "I will stutter", whenever I am speaking alone, then such weak anticipation won't be enough to trigger stuttering. But, it's the same "anticipatory thought" (such as: "I might stutter").. so this would imply that "being convinced" is also a trigger. Example of being convinced: A hypnotist asks someone in a trance to lift a glass of water of the table after giving them the suggestion that the glass weighs a ton. You can see the person struggling and straining, attempting to lift the glass, but he cannot. While the mind of the hypnotized person is activating the muscles involved in lifting, it is also simultaneously activating muscles that resist the lift, which reflects his belief that the glass is extremely heavy. His subconscious mind is orchestrating this very complex set of activities that creates a reality coherent with his belief. Both sets of muscles are working all out to handle this glass, like an isometric exercise, so there is no net effect on the glass. In this way whatever beliefs we acquire will shape our biology. So, I argue that, what is basically, "self-hypnotizing" (to immerse ourselves so much in such story-telling), leads to convincing ourselves of such 'maladaptive' expectations (which is actually just a reason we have created to disrupt execution of speech motor plans), IMO. If we then perceive that such a trigger (in this case "convincing ourselves") has reached a certain threshold (such as, the variable release threshold), then this expectation will trigger us, and thus, we perceive this as a speech error or conflict, and then shutting down of speech initiation occurs. This is just how I view it, in my own opinion. What do you think? If this is true, then can we really say that anticipation (such as: "I might stutter") is the problem? Or, is it better to say that the underlying factor is the problem, such as mentioned in above example: "convincing-self-hypnotizing"? In fact, I can even tell myself "I will fall when I walk", while I execute my leg muscles. Similarly, I can tell myself "I will stutter" while instructing to execute speech movements. I believe that a more significant problem would be, that we actually rely on reducing anticipation for initiating speech motor plans (maladaptive expectation), and thus, the problem is more likely that we blame anticipation. >"You stumble on the word you did not anticipate, then there is negligible spike activity (no associative synaptic plasticity), and you will attach no particular significance to pronunciation of that part for future instances, and thus no anticipatory feedback." I agree with what you said. Additionally, let's say that I stuttered 50 times on the sound /P/, and 50 times on the /M/. But, let's hypothetically say that I develop beliefs based on wrong information such as: "The sound /P/ is too hard to pronounce because the P sounds like an explosion sound". If I would then start relying on this false belief (or story-telling), then I would only enable myself to add yet another unnecessary expectation, such as: "The letter P makes it harder for me to execute speech motor plans" (maladaptive expectation). This expectation by itself will then make me sensitive or error-prone enough to be trigger by such expectation. So, if we would use your words, then such expectations (or story-telling) would lead to associative synaptic plasticity, attaching significance to initiating similar motor programs, and thus anticipatory feedback. What do you think?