Comments on: Are… um… Filler Words… ah… Okay?

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:41:12 +0000

This book will be on my must read list. Through the years, there have been numerous speakers and even radio DJ’s who add “uh’s, and uh’s and other word whiskers on purpose. Few were able to pull it off.

One of the most distracting of them is saying and now, and now, and now for every connective.

At this point, not having read the book, it is going to be hard to wrap my mind around the idea that it could be good.

I have written about this and feel the pinnacle is being able to avoid, uh, using them.

http://www.speechmastery.com/word-whiskers.html

http://www.speechmastery.com/word-whisker-elimination.html

By: Allyncia

Allyncia — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:56:21 +0000

The “um” does give away a lot. I think that it gives a level of authenticity yet that unrehearsed sound also exposes one’s true heart and that can be risky. Maybe instead of talking about Obama’s ‘um’s we need to give some attention to Biden’s. Its not easy to live speaking on the record so we all have to take some punches as public speakers who may want to speak off the cuff because sometimes we really drive home a good point. Think before we speak is always the best point we could ever make.

By: Christina McKay, J.D.

Christina McKay, J.D. — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 01:41:14 +0000

Personally I find “filler word” undermine the power of the presenter to convey his/her message effectively. Just within day to day communication alone, I hear overuse of “ums, and ahs” – which greatly impair the credibility of the speaker.

I say steer clear! These are surely words we do not want to give more power to.

By: michael erard

michael erard — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 21:33:18 +0000

The author of Um… here. I really do recommend that people read this book, because it will help people answer a lot of these questions. Why do hesitation phenomena occur? Do they have a function? Is a speech really like a conversation? Where did the notion that umlessness is a feature of good speaking come from?

On the notion of whether “um” distracts (which I see in a few comments here):
1. the scholarly evidence that filled pauses distract listeners from messages and taint a speaker’s credibility seems to come universally from university speech communication classes, so the sample is very biased to rating them negatively.
2. Some later psycholinguistic research has shown that listeners recognize words *faster* when they are preceded by an “uh” or “um” — that contradicts the notion that filled pauses are universally problematic in all speech acts.
3. In fact, all listeners do not attend to filled pauses. A certain proportion of listeners naturally attend to content; a certain proportion naturally attend to style. This will be hard to believe in a Toastmasters context, where you’re trained to listen for style — which means that TMers are unnaturally primed to listen for the “uh.” How it made its way into the TM program is something I describe in my book, in the chapter, “A brief history of ‘um.’”

There’s much more to say about this — and I did, in my book.

thanks,
Michael

By: Speedlinking - Posts I’ve Read - 1st June 2009 - Pro Humorist :Pro Humorist

Sun, 19 Jul 2009 21:49:51 +0000

[...] Andrew Dlugan has a post over at Six Minutes about whether filler words are actually detrimental: Are… um… Filler Words… ah… Okay?. It could be that it’s just a bad thing when it comes to Toastmasters. Although, I [...]

By: Gene Grindle

Gene Grindle — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 22:22:24 +0000

Anything that doesn’t add value to your communication diminishes your communications. Period.

Filler words add nothing.

While it is true that one or two is not a killer, why not aim for zero.

By: bharath reddy

bharath reddy — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:32:42 +0000

I have a small post about this on my blog:
http://bharathreddyt.wordpress.com/2009/05/15/ah-hmm-well-you-know-i-mean-actually-basically-like/

Filler words are used essentially to keep talking when you’ve to give a little time to your mind to pop the next word you would utter. Practicing your speeches would be a great way to avoid using them but again, how often do we practice and talk? a better way is to notice and keep track of your fillers yourself. May be record when you speak and listen to it later.Once you become aware of your fillers, you’ll automatically reduce using them; that is, if you wish to be a good speaker.

By: Jon Thomas

Jon Thomas — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:37:11 +0000

I truly don’t believe it’s that big of a deal. Yes, it can distract the audience slightly, but it can also endear you to them (just as slightly). So much about branding is transparency. As a presenter, you want to be you, the real you, up there. Nobody speaks perfectly. It’s abnormal to speak perfectly. If we can get past the fear of having a few “um’s” and “ah’s” in our presentations, we can begin to tackle larger problems.

By: Dr. Jim Anderson

Dr. Jim Anderson — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 19:13:25 +0000

Nothing that you say can kill a speech that has great content. However, you need to view each word as a tool with which to connect with your audience and “um’s” and “ah’s” are basically wasted words.

This generally happens because our brains are racing ahead to figure out what we want to say next. Practice is the ultimate cure – this is how you’ll always know what comes next…!

- Dr. Jim Anderson
The Accidental Communicator Blog
“Learn How To intimately connect with your audience in order to make an lasting impact in their lives.”

By: Michael Gerharz

Michael Gerharz — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 06:12:34 +0000

“1. Definitely a distraction for the listener.”

I’m afraid, according to science that’s not true. In fact, fillers can even improve the understanding of your words. Several studies have shown that people remember “difficult” parts of your speech better when they are preceded by an “um” (because this way they are prepared for it).

Sure, this doesn’t mean to use “um” purposely, but it is clear evidence that “ums” aren’t such a great harm at all as long as you don’t use it excessively.

Evidence e.g. in these two scientific papers:
http://www.unc.edu/~jarnold/papers/Arnold.Fagnano.Tanenhaus.JPR.pdf
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.10.010