An expressive painting of a smiling woman with dark hair and a light purple top, positioned next to three colorful comic-style speech bubbles containing the word "Bubble".
Sometimes I see a word on a screen and feel compelled to say it. Once, perhaps twice. And if it has particularly exceptional mouthfeel, maybe thrice.
It is not necessarily the meaning of the word that draws me in. Sometimes it is the sound. Sometimes it is the physical experience of producing it. There are words that simply feel good to say. The combination of sounds, the movement of my mouth, the positioning of my tongue, and the way the word comes together can be satisfying in a way that is difficult to explain to someone who does not experience it.
I describe this experience as verbal stimming. Stimming is commonly understood as repetitive self-stimulatory behavior that can involve movement, vocalization, and language. For me, it takes the form of repeating particular words because I enjoy the sensory experience of saying them. Sometimes it is the sound, sometimes the physical experience of articulation, and sometimes the combination of the two. The word itself becomes a source of sensory pleasure.
What interests me is not whether this behavior qualifies as stimming, but how we understand the sensory experience of language production and why certain words invite repetition.
As someone with ADHD and a professional background in clinical practice and research, I find this experience interesting for more than one reason. I recognize it in myself, but I also want to understand what might be happening. Is this sensory seeking? Is it a form of self-stimulation? Is it related to the way some neurodivergent individuals experience language? Or is it simply a pleasurable behavior that does not need to be explained through a diagnostic framework?
These are not interchangeable questions, and the existing research does not provide a definitive answer.
What I can say is that certain words invite repetition. I am not repeating them because I have forgotten what they mean or because I need to communicate something more clearly. I am repeating them because the act of saying them is enjoyable.
That experience deserves a closer look.
Language Is a Sensory Experience, Too
We generally approach language through its communicative and cognitive functions. Words allow us to organize thought, convey meaning, establish connection, and communicate experiences that might otherwise remain internal. From this perspective, the value of a word is largely understood through what it represents and what it communicates. However, language production is also a physical and sensory process, one that involves the coordinated movement of the tongue, lips, jaw, respiratory system, and vocal apparatus. The production of speech requires continuous motor coordination, auditory feedback, and the integration of multiple sensory systems. Each word carries its own combination of phonetic characteristics and articulatory demands, creating a physical experience that varies depending on the sounds being produced and the movements required to produce them.
For me, this is where the experience becomes particularly interesting. There are words I enjoy saying that have very little to do with their meaning. I am drawn to their sound, their rhythm, and the physical sensation of articulating them. I sometimes describe this as mouthfeel, a term that captures the sensory satisfaction I experience when producing particular combinations of sounds. Some words seem to have an almost tangible quality when spoken. The movement of the tongue, the placement of the lips, the sequence of sounds, and the resulting auditory feedback come together in a way that makes me want to repeat the word. Reading it silently does not provide quite the same satisfaction as actually saying it.
This experience invites us to consider language production beyond its traditional role in communication. We readily acknowledge that sensory stimulation can be pleasurable when it involves music, movement, texture, taste, or visual experiences. Yet the sensory qualities of producing language receive considerably less attention. Speaking is not simply the translation of thought into words; it is an embodied activity involving motor, auditory, and somatosensory processes. The experience of producing a word therefore offers sensory information that is not fully captured by reading or listening alone. Hearing someone else say a word provides an auditory experience, while producing that same word introduces the additional physical feedback associated with articulation. For someone who experiences pleasure through verbal repetition, that combination may be precisely what makes certain words so appealing.
What I find particularly interesting is that the repetition itself is not necessarily driven by a need to communicate, clarify, or regulate an uncomfortable emotional state. Sometimes I simply enjoy saying the word. The sensory experience of producing it is sufficient reason to say it again.
What Do We Mean by Verbal Stimming?
The term stimming, short for self-stimulatory behavior, is most often discussed in relation to autism and commonly brings to mind repetitive movements or sounds such as rocking, hand movements, humming, repeating sounds, or repeating words. These behaviors are frequently understood in terms of sensory or emotional regulation, including how an individual responds to environmental demands or manages an experience of distress. However, framing stimming primarily as a regulatory response can leave out an important part of the experience: repetitive behavior can also be pleasurable in its own right. A person may repeat a movement, sound, or word not because they are trying to reduce discomfort or manage an overwhelming environment, but simply because the sensory experience is enjoyable.
The Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust (n.d.) includes movement, vocal sounds, and sensory experiences in its description of stimming. Its resource also identifies repeating words, making other mouth sounds, and experiencing pleasure through auditory and movement sensations as possible expressions of stimming. This is particularly relevant to what I am describing. I use the term verbal stimming to describe the intentional or spontaneous repetition of words when the experience of producing them is itself pleasurable. The appeal may involve the sound of a word, the physical movements required to articulate it, or the combination of auditory and sensory feedback that occurs when I say it. I am not proposing a new clinical category or suggesting that all word repetition should be understood as stimming. Rather, I am using an established descriptive term to identify a particular experience of repetitive language production that is often overlooked when we focus exclusively on the communicative purpose of speech.
It is also important not to assume that behaviors that look similar are necessarily expressions of the same underlying experience. Echolalia, repetitive speech, self-directed speech, vocal stereotypies, and the pleasurable repetition of language may overlap in their observable features, but they should not automatically be treated as interchangeable. Repeating another person's words, talking aloud to organize one's thoughts, producing a repeated vocalization, and saying a particular word because it feels satisfying to articulate it may involve different experiences and serve different purposes. The behavior itself does not provide enough information to determine its function or meaning. We need to consider the individual's experience, the circumstances in which the repetition occurs, and what the person receives from engaging in it.
This is where a person-centered approach becomes essential. Rather than assigning a function to repetitive behavior based solely on what an observer sees, we should make room for the individual's own account of the experience. Does the repetition feel comforting or enjoyable? Does it support concentration or help the person manage environmental stimulation? Does it happen automatically, or is there an intentional choice to repeat the word? Does it occur during periods of overwhelm, excitement, or boredom, or does it arise simply because the person encounters a word they particularly enjoy saying? These questions are not interchangeable, and the answers may vary considerably from one individual to another. If we assume that all stimming is an attempt at regulation, we risk overlooking the sensory pleasure, curiosity, and enjoyment that can also motivate repetition. Understanding verbal stimming requires us to take those experiences seriously, including when the behavior serves no purpose beyond the pleasure of doing it.
What Autism Research Can Teach Us About Stimming
One of the more useful studies examining the lived experience of stimming is the qualitative research conducted by Kapp et al. (2019). The researchers interviewed and held focus groups with 32 autistic adults to explore how participants understood their own stimming, why they engaged in these behaviors, what value they associated with them, and how they experienced other people's responses. Two central themes emerged from the findings: stimming as a form of self-regulation and the role of social acceptance and stigmatization. Participants described repetitive movements and vocalizations as ways of managing sensory input, emotional intensity, and experiences of overwhelm. However, their accounts also made clear that stimming was not always a response to discomfort. Some participants experienced these behaviors as comfortable, calming, or simply enjoyable. They also challenged the assumption that repetitive behaviors should be discouraged or eliminated merely because they appear unusual to others.
I find this research valuable because it moves the discussion beyond the external observation of behavior and places greater emphasis on the meaning that behavior holds for the person engaging in it. Too often, repetitive movements and vocalizations are interpreted through the perspective of an observer, with their function assumed rather than explored. Kapp et al. (2019) offer a different approach by attending to autistic adults' own descriptions of their experiences. Their findings remind us that a behavior can serve multiple purposes and that its value cannot necessarily be determined by how it appears to someone else. In particular, the recognition that stimming may be pleasurable, rather than exclusively regulatory, creates room for a broader understanding of why people engage in repetitive sensory and vocal behaviors.
There is, however, an important limitation to consider when applying this research to the experience I am describing. Kapp et al. (2019) studied autistic adults, and their findings cannot establish that adults with ADHD experience verbal stimming in the same way or for the same reasons. Autism and ADHD can involve overlapping sensory experiences, and some individuals have both diagnoses, but overlap does not establish that the underlying experiences or processes are identical. It would be a mistake to treat findings from research with one neurodevelopmental population as direct evidence about another. We can use this literature to identify relevant questions, consider areas of possible overlap, and develop a more nuanced understanding of repetitive sensory behavior without extending the findings beyond what the study actually examined.
For me, Kapp et al. (2019) provide a useful framework for considering stimming as an experience that may hold personal value, including when that value is pleasure rather than relief from distress. Their research supports taking the individual's account seriously and resisting the assumption that repetitive behavior must be explained as a problem to be managed. It does not, however, explain why I find certain words so satisfying to say, nor does it answer whether adults with ADHD experience similar forms of sensory pleasure through repetitive language. Those questions remain open, and they are part of what makes this subject worth exploring.
What Does ADHD Research Tell Us About Sensory Processing?
Research examining sensory processing in individuals with ADHD has grown in recent years, challenging the assumption that sensory differences are primarily or exclusively associated with autism. This body of literature is relevant to understanding the broader ADHD experience because it draws attention to how individuals with ADHD may perceive, respond to, and engage with sensory information in their environments. Jurek et al. (2025) examined this relationship through a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing sensory processing patterns in individuals with ADHD and control populations. Their review included 30 studies involving 5,374 participants, although the distribution across age groups is worth noting: 23 studies focused on children, while only seven examined adults. The researchers identified significant group differences across several sensory-processing patterns, including sensory sensitivity, sensory avoidance, low sensory registration, and sensory seeking. Taken together, these findings suggest that sensory processing is a relevant consideration in understanding ADHD and should not be dismissed as incidental to the condition.
The findings are meaningful, but they also require careful interpretation. Jurek et al. (2025) reported substantial heterogeneity across the included studies, indicating considerable variation in study results. Furthermore, only nine of the 30 studies were assessed as having an overall low risk of bias. The adult findings also warrant particular attention. Unlike some of the other sensory-processing patterns examined, sensory seeking did not show a statistically significant difference between adults with ADHD and comparison groups. This matters because it would be easy to read the broader findings and conclude that sensory seeking is a defining feature of ADHD. The evidence does not support that conclusion. Research can identify patterns at the group level without establishing that every individual with a particular diagnosis will share those experiences. Adults with ADHD may experience sensory sensitivity, avoidance, reduced registration, or sensory seeking in different ways, and some may not identify with these patterns at all.
It is equally important not to extend these findings beyond what the research actually examined. Jurek et al. (2025) provide evidence of differences in sensory processing associated with ADHD, but their review does not establish pleasurable word repetition as an ADHD-specific behavior, nor does it explain why an individual might repeatedly produce particular words for the sensory satisfaction of saying them. I am interested in this research because it gives us a broader context in which to consider sensory experiences as part of the ADHD profile. It allows us to ask whether certain forms of repetitive language production might be understood, at least in some individuals, through the lens of sensory seeking or sensory enjoyment. That remains a question for further investigation rather than an established finding. For now, the research supports taking sensory experiences seriously when considering ADHD, while remaining attentive to the considerable variation in how those experiences present across individuals.
The Problem With Making the Oral Sensory Connection Too Quickly
This is where I think the interpretation of the research requires particular care. It would be tempting to examine the ADHD sensory-processing literature, identify findings related to oral sensory processing, and use those findings to explain why I enjoy articulating certain words. On the surface, the connection seems reasonable. If sensory processing differences are associated with ADHD, and some of those differences involve oral sensory experiences, it might seem logical to suggest that the pleasure I experience when repeating particular words is an expression of that sensory profile. However, that conclusion would extend beyond what the available research actually demonstrates.
Jurek et al. (2025) examined multiple sensory modalities, including oral sensory processing, and reported greater oral-processing difficulties among ADHD participants compared with control groups, including within adult samples. These findings contribute to our understanding of sensory processing in ADHD, but oral sensory processing and the physical experience of producing speech are not necessarily measuring the same experience. Oral sensory processing can involve how an individual experiences sensations associated with the mouth, including taste and other oral sensations. Speech production, by comparison, involves the coordinated motor activity required to articulate sounds, along with auditory feedback and the sensory information associated with those movements. Although these processes involve related anatomical structures and interact in the production of speech, evidence of differences in one area does not establish corresponding differences in another. We need to be careful not to treat related sensory and motor processes as interchangeable simply because they involve the same general region of the body.
More importantly, Jurek et al. (2025) did not investigate whether adults with ADHD repeat particular words because they enjoy the physical experience of producing them. Their findings cannot tell us whether the satisfaction I experience when articulating certain words is related to oral sensory processing, speech motor activity, auditory feedback, or some combination of these experiences. My experience may be consistent with a sensory explanation, but consistency is not evidence of an established mechanism. I think it is important to maintain that distinction, particularly when discussing emerging areas of research involving neurodivergent experiences. There is value in identifying a possible connection and asking whether it warrants further investigation, but that is different from presenting the connection as an established explanation. I would rather leave the question open and acknowledge what we do not yet know than assign a neurological explanation that the current evidence cannot support.
Pleasure Is a Valid Function, Too
One point I want to emphasize is that repetitive behavior does not always need to be understood as an attempt to manage distress or regulate an uncomfortable internal state. Much of the clinical discussion surrounding stimming focuses on sensory overload, emotional dysregulation, anxiety, and the role of repetitive behavior in supporting self-regulation. These are important aspects of the experience, and they deserve attention. However, when regulation becomes the primary explanation through which we interpret all stimming, we risk overlooking another possibility: sometimes people engage in repetitive behavior because they enjoy it. The behavior itself can be rewarding. There does not necessarily need to be an underlying problem to solve, an uncomfortable sensation to reduce, or an emotional state to regulate.
The Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust (n.d.) explicitly acknowledges that some stimming occurs for enjoyment, including pleasurable auditory, visual, and movement sensations. I think this is an important consideration in how we understand neurodivergent experiences. If we automatically interpret every repetitive behavior as a response to dysregulation, we impose a clinical explanation that may not reflect the individual's actual experience. In my own case, I do not experience every appealing word as a response to sensory overload, anxiety, or emotional discomfort. Sometimes I encounter a word that I particularly enjoy saying, and I repeat it because the experience is satisfying. The sound, rhythm, and physical production of the word are enjoyable in themselves. I do not need to identify a larger emotional explanation for why I want to say it again. Sometimes enjoyment is a sufficient explanation.
I think our understanding of neurodivergence needs to make room for experiences that are pleasurable without requiring them to be therapeutic, compensatory, or symptom-driven. This also raises an important question for researchers studying repetitive language behaviors: are we adequately differentiating among repetition associated with emotional regulation, sensory seeking, enjoyment, habit, communication, and other possible functions? These motivations may overlap, but assuming they are interchangeable limits what we can learn about the behavior and the person engaging in it. A more careful examination of function would allow researchers to investigate why people repeat words and sounds, how individuals experience that repetition, and whether the motivations or sensory qualities differ across neurodevelopmental populations. Similar behaviors do not necessarily reflect identical experiences, and understanding those differences begins with asking people what the behavior means to them rather than deciding its purpose based solely on observation.
Inner Speech, Self-Talk, and the ADHD Brain
There is another aspect of my experience that I find interesting, particularly because it involves the relationship between language and the way I think. My brain is rarely quiet. I experience a considerable amount of internal dialogue, ongoing commentary, and self-directed language. At times, I have what feels like an entire conversation in my head. At other times, I narrate what I am doing, talk myself through a task, or find myself saying something aloud because the thought seems to need an external voice. I have previously written about the experience of having a brain that never stops talking, but I do not think that continuous internal dialogue and pleasurable word repetition should automatically be understood as the same phenomenon. Both involve language, and they may occasionally overlap, but the experience and motivation behind them can be quite different.
Benfield and Cole (2026) examined the relationship between ADHD-like behavioral traits and self-directed speech across three experiments involving a total of 594 participants. Participants reporting higher levels of ADHD-like traits also reported greater use of self-directed speech, including both overt self-talk and inner speech. The researchers proposed that self-directed speech may function as a displacement activity or a form of camouflaging, offering an interesting perspective on how individuals with ADHD-like traits may use language internally and externally. These findings contribute to the discussion of language as part of the ADHD experience, particularly the ways in which individuals may rely on verbal processes to organize, engage with, or navigate their thoughts and activities. However, the study did not examine sensory-driven word repetition or whether individuals repeat particular words because they enjoy the auditory or physical experience of producing them. Consequently, it cannot tell us whether these experiences are related or whether they involve different underlying processes.
I find it useful to consider these experiences separately rather than grouping them together under the broad description of excessive talking or verbal activity. Sometimes I am talking because language is the way my thinking unfolds. Sometimes I am narrating an activity or working through an idea by giving it an internal or external voice. Other times, I am repeating a word simply because I enjoy producing it. There are also moments when these experiences overlap, such as when a word emerges during an internal conversation and I find myself repeating it for the pleasure of saying it. Although these experiences may be related in some way, we do not currently have sufficient evidence to establish a shared mechanism or assume that they serve the same function. Reducing them all to a tendency toward excessive talking would overlook meaningful differences in the subjective experience. Language can be a way of thinking, a means of communicating, and, at times, a sensory experience in its own right. I think that last possibility deserves more attention in conversations about ADHD and neurodivergence.
What I Think We Are Missing
I am interested in the smaller, less frequently discussed experiences of living with ADHD, particularly those that do not necessarily present as difficulties or impairments. Much of the conversation surrounding ADHD appropriately focuses on executive functioning, attention, impulsivity, working memory, emotional regulation, and the challenges of navigating environments that are not designed with neurodivergent ways of thinking and functioning in mind. These are important areas of research and clinical attention, but they do not capture the full range of what it means to experience ADHD. There are also experiences that are enjoyable, highly individual, sometimes difficult to describe, and not easily categorized within the symptom-based frameworks through which ADHD is commonly understood. I think we need to pay greater attention to these experiences, not because they necessarily represent new symptoms or diagnostic features, but because they contribute to a more complete understanding of neurodivergent life.
My fascination with particular words may ultimately have nothing to do with ADHD specifically. It could reflect an individual sensory preference, the auditory qualities of certain words, the physical feedback associated with articulation, or some combination of these factors. It may also be an experience shared by people with and without ADHD. At this point, we simply do not have enough direct research to draw conclusions about its prevalence, underlying processes, or relationship to neurodevelopmental differences. What I would like to see is research that examines pleasurable verbal repetition as an experience in its own right, rather than treating it as a secondary feature of broader sensory-processing or repetitive-behavior research. For example, researchers could explore whether the pleasure associated with repeating particular words is primarily auditory, related to the physical movements involved in articulation, connected to rhythm or phonetic structure, or produced through the interaction of several sensory experiences. It would also be useful to examine whether these experiences differ among individuals with ADHD, autism, both diagnoses, or neither, while remaining attentive to individual variation within each group.
Equally important, I would want this research to begin with the accounts of the people who experience these behaviors. Behavioral observation can tell us that someone repeats a word, but it cannot necessarily tell us whether the repetition is enjoyable, regulating, automatic, communicative, or motivated by something else entirely. There is a meaningful difference between documenting that a behavior occurs and understanding what that behavior means to the individual. That difference matters in clinical practice as much as it does in research. A neuroaffirming approach requires us to remain curious about the person's experience rather than assigning a function based solely on outward observation. Repetitive behavior is not automatically problematic, meaningless, or something that needs to be modified simply because it falls outside what is considered typical. Sometimes the person is engaging in a behavior because it feels good, and that experience deserves to be understood on its own terms.
Sometimes a Word Is Just Really Fun to Say
I am not suggesting that research has established verbal stimming as an ADHD symptom, because it has not. Nor am I suggesting that everyone who repeats words is engaging in the same behavior or experiencing the same underlying sensory process. What I am suggesting is that we might benefit from considering language beyond its communicative purpose and paying closer attention to the experience of producing it.
For me, certain words are enjoyable simply because of how they feel when I say them. I like the sound, the movement of my mouth, the coordination involved in producing the word, and the way its individual sounds come together. There are times when reading a word silently does not provide quite the same satisfaction as saying it aloud. The enjoyment is not necessarily connected to what the word means, but rather to the physical and auditory experience of producing it. I find this interesting, both personally and professionally, because it raises questions about the sensory dimensions of language that receive relatively little attention in discussions of ADHD.
There may be a sensory component to this experience, perhaps involving auditory feedback, articulatory movement, or the interaction between the two. It is also possible that certain phonetic combinations are simply more pleasurable to produce than others. And, of course, this may be an experience shared by people across neurotypes rather than something specific to ADHD. I do not have an evidence-based explanation for why some words feel particularly satisfying to say, and I do not think it would be appropriate to assign one without further research.
I am comfortable leaving the question open. Not every experience needs to be translated into a symptom, assigned a diagnostic explanation, or understood exclusively through the lens of impairment. There is value in noticing the small, sometimes pleasurable, and occasionally unusual aspects of how we experience the world. Curiosity does not require an immediate explanation, and recognizing an experience does not require establishing that it is clinically significant. Sometimes the more useful response is simply to acknowledge that something happens, consider what it might tell us, and remain open to what future research may reveal.
In the meantime, if I encounter a particularly satisfying word, I am probably going to say it. Once, twice, and, if the articulatory experience warrants it, thrice.
References
Benfield, E., & Cole, G. G. (2026). Self-directed speech and attention deficit hyperactive disorder-like behaviours. British Journal of Psychology, 117(1), 301–313. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.70027
Jurek, L., Duchier, A., Gauld, C., Hénault, L., Giroudon, C., Fourneret, P., Cortese, S., & Nourredine, M. (2025). Sensory processing in individuals with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder compared with control populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 64(10), 1132–1147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2025.02.019
Kapp, S. K., Steward, R., Crane, L., Elliott, D., Elphick, C., Pellicano, E., & Russell, G. (2019). “People should be allowed to do what they like”: Autistic adults’ views and experiences of stimming. Autism, 23(7), 1782–1792. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361319829628
Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust. (n.d.). Stimming and autism. Autism Space.
