Selective Mute

Selective mutism is a childhood anxiety disorder in which a learner consistently fails to speak in specific social situations (typically school) despite speaking normally elsewhere. It is not shyness, defiance, or a speech delay. The DSM-5 classifies selective mutism as an anxiety disorder; the American Psychiatric Association moved it out of the "Disorders of Infancy, Childhood, or Adolescence" category in 2013. Most learners develop symptoms between the ages of three and five, but the disorder is often not identified for several years (Kovac and Furr, 2018).

This article was last revised in April 2026 to align the clinical framing with the DSM-5 (APA, 2013) and Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists guidance, and to remove earlier content that implied auditory processing disorder and sensory processing disorder were established causes of selective mutism.

<

‍

What is selective mutism?

Selective mutism is a low-prevalence anxiety disorder with a persistent pattern: the learner speaks fluently at home or with familiar people but becomes consistently silent in specific social situations, most often at school. The DSM-5 criteria (APA, 2013) specify that the silence must last for at least one month (not counting the first month of school), must interfere with educational or social functioning, and must not be better explained by a communication disorder, autism, schizophrenia, or another psychotic disorder.

Prevalence estimates range from 0.2 per cent to 1.9 per cent of learners (Rodrigues Pereira et al., 2020). Onset is most common between three and five years, but many cases are not identified until school entry exposes the pattern (Kovac and Furr, 2018). The disorder affects twice as many girls as boys in most population studies.

A large follow-up study by Oerbeck and colleagues (2018) found that 23 per cent of children who had received treatment for selective mutism met the criteria for social phobia five years later, which reinforces the DSM-5 decision to classify selective mutism within the anxiety disorders rather than as a speech or language difficulty.

‍

How does selective mutism present in the classroom?

Teachers usually notice selective mutism because the pattern is strikingly situational. A learner will chat freely with parents at the school gate, then fall silent as soon as they cross the threshold. Some learners produce a whisper; some use one-word answers to a single trusted adult; some do not speak at all, sometimes for a whole academic year.

Common classroom indicators include:

• Complete or near-complete silence with staff and most peers, while speech at home is normal.
• Frozen body language, avoided eye contact, and delayed responses to direct questions.
• Use of non-verbal communication (pointing, writing, nodding) to meet needs.
• Visible distress when verbal participation is requested, including pallor, tears, or physical withdrawal.
• Fluent speech that has been observed at home, on video, or with a specific trusted adult, ruling out a speech or language disorder.

These indicators are not a diagnostic checklist. They are the evidence a teacher gathers to trigger a referral through the SENCO for specialist assessment.

‍

‍

What causes selective mutism?

Current clinical consensus treats selective mutism as a manifestation of extreme social anxiety (Cohan et al., 2006; Oerbeck et al., 2018). Three factors recur in the research:

1. Inhibited temperament. Kagan's work on behavioural inhibition showed that some children show a stable pattern of anxious withdrawal from the unfamiliar from toddlerhood onwards; selectively mute children over-represent within this group (Kagan, 1994).
2. Family history of anxiety. First-degree relatives of children with selective mutism are more likely to have social phobia or generalised anxiety than the general population (Chavira et al., 2007).
3. Bilingualism and migration. A silent period is developmentally normal for children acquiring a new language, and should not be confused with selective mutism in the first few months. Selective mutism is diagnosed only when silence persists beyond the expected silent period and extends across situations that should feel comfortable.

Earlier versions of this article listed auditory processing disorder (APD) and sensory processing disorder (SPD) among the causes of selective mutism. Neither is supported by the current evidence base, and neither appears in the DSM-5 or the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists guidance as an established causal factor. APD remains a contested diagnostic category in children (Kamhi and Wallach, 2012), and SPD is not a recognised DSM-5 disorder; it is not policy of the American Academy of Pediatrics to use it as a stand-alone diagnosis (AAP, 2012). Where a learner has a co-occurring, separately diagnosed communication or sensory profile, that diagnosis is managed alongside the selective mutism, not treated as its cause.

‍

Who diagnoses and treats selective mutism?

Diagnosis is a clinical activity, not a classroom one. In the UK, the referral pathway from school typically runs:

School SENCO → GP or school nurse → CAMHS, clinical psychology, or a paediatric speech and language therapy service → formal DSM-5 assessment → treatment plan.

An educational psychologist may be involved where there is diagnostic uncertainty about co-occurring learning needs. A speech and language therapist assesses underlying receptive and expressive language so that a language disorder is not missed. CAMHS or a clinical psychologist leads on the anxiety treatment once the diagnosis is confirmed.

The evidence-based treatments are behavioural and cognitive-behavioural. Steains and colleagues (2021) meta-analysed five randomised controlled trials (n = 233) and reported a large overall effect size (g = 0.87) for psychological intervention compared with no treatment. Hipolito and colleagues (2023) reached a similar conclusion in a larger 25-study systematic review, with a Hedges' g of 1.06 for combined systems and behavioural approaches. Medication (SSRIs) is used in a minority of cases where CBT alone is insufficient (Østergaard, 2018).

Several structured protocols are in use:

• Integrated Behavior Therapy for Selective Mutism (IBTSM): Bergman et al. (2013) demonstrated 75 per cent treatment-responder rates in a randomised pilot.
• Parent-Child Interaction Therapy for Selective Mutism (PCIT-SM): Catchpole et al. (2019) reported large post-treatment gains (d = 1.80) maintained at 12-month follow-up.
• Intensive Group Behavioral Treatment (IGBT): a five-day camp format, with 46 per cent of children free of an SM diagnosis eight weeks into the following school year (Cornacchio et al., 2019).
• School-based modular CBT: Oerbeck et al. (2018) reported 70 per cent full remission and 17 per cent partial remission at five-year follow-up.

‍

What can a teacher do in the classroom?

The teacher's role is to make the classroom an environment in which communication becomes possible, and to support the clinical intervention once a referral is in place. The research base, synthesised by Kovac and Furr (2018) and Zakszeski and colleagues (2017), supports the following approaches:

Reduce verbal demand in the opening weeks. Do not expect speech in the first month of school (this aligns with the DSM-5 "first month exclusion"). Use fixed-choice questions, nodding, or thumbs-up or thumbs-down responses until the learner is settled.

Run a warm-up window. Where the family agrees, invite the learner into the classroom ten or fifteen minutes before the rest of the class. The low-demand environment lets the learner map the room and the trusted adult while arousal is low. Shipon-Blum (2010) describes this as a gradual acclimatisation step, and Kovac and Furr (2018) report positive effects.

Use the sliding-in technique. A trusted adult (usually a parent or keyworker) speaks with the learner in the empty classroom. A second adult, usually the teacher, is then gradually introduced and moves closer in small, agreed steps. The learner controls the pace; speech is not demanded, only made progressively more possible.

Accept non-verbal communication as valid. Written answers, recorded voice on an iPad, pointing, drawing, and gesture are all legitimate forms of classroom participation. Praise participation rather than speech specifically. Johnson and Wintgens (2017) set out a staged hierarchy that teachers can use to track micro-progress.

Fade reinforcement. Once a learner begins to speak to a second adult, fade the first adult out of the room in small steps, then introduce a third adult or peer in a controlled way. The structure matters because unplanned verbal moments, especially big teacher reactions to a first word, can cause the learner to retreat back into silence.

Work with the SLT or clinical psychologist. If a clinician is already involved, ask for the treatment plan and align the classroom strategy with it. Consistency between home, school, and clinic is the single biggest predictor of progress (Bergman et al., 2013).

‍

Common classroom mistakes to avoid

The research literature and RCSLT guidance flag a consistent set of counter-productive practices.

• Asking "why won't you talk?" The child cannot answer the question and the question itself raises anxiety.
• Offering rewards for speaking. This sets up an implicit demand, which functions identically to a punishment for a learner whose anxiety blocks speech.
• Reacting strongly when the learner first speaks. Public praise, clapping, or calling another adult in to witness the moment can drive the child back into silence. The clinical guidance is to respond as if speech were the expected norm.
• Punitive consequences for not speaking. Missing playtime, being kept behind, or public comment about the silence all increase anxiety and worsen outcomes (Cohan et al., 2006).
• Waiting too long to refer. Kovac and Furr (2018) report an average lag of three years between symptom onset and treatment. Early referral carries better prognosis (Oerbeck et al., 2018).

‍

When should a teacher refer?

Refer to the SENCO, who will decide on onward referral to GP, CAMHS, or SLT, when:

• Silence has persisted beyond the first month of school, and is consistent rather than intermittent.
• The family confirms that the learner speaks normally at home.
• The pattern is interfering with learning, assessment, or peer relationships.
• A bilingual learner has passed through the expected silent period (usually up to six months) and remains silent in situations where first-language speakers are present.
• There are co-occurring signs of broader anxiety (separation anxiety, sleep disturbance, somatic complaints).

Do not wait for certainty. Documented teacher concerns, a parent conversation, and an SLT or CAMHS referral can run in parallel with continued classroom support.

‍

Limitations and ongoing debate

The evidence base for selective mutism has known gaps. Only five RCTs of psychological intervention existed at the point of the Steains et al. (2021) meta-analysis, with a combined sample of 233 children. Treatment manuals vary substantially across studies, and outcome measures are not harmonised (Hipolito et al., 2023). The optimal duration of treatment and the role of SSRI medication in children whose CBT has stalled are still open questions (Østergaard, 2018). The long silent period that bilingual learners show complicates prevalence estimates and delays identification.

None of this weakens the case that selective mutism is an anxiety disorder, or that CBT-based treatment is effective; it means the classroom practitioner should expect some variability in the speed and completeness of response, and should keep the clinician in the loop rather than adjust the plan unilaterally.

‍

Frequently Asked Questions

‍

‍

‍

Further Reading: Key Research Papers

Bergman, R. L., Gonzalez, A., Piacentini, J., and Keller, M. L. (2013). Integrated Behavior Therapy for Selective Mutism: a randomized controlled pilot study. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 51(10), 680–689. View study →

Cornacchio, D., Furr, J. M., Sanchez, A. L., Hong, N., Feinberg, L. K., Tenenbaum, R., Del Busto, C., Bry, L. J., Poznanski, B., Miguel, E., Ollendick, T. H., Kurtz, S. M. S., and Comer, J. S. (2019). Intensive group behavioral treatment (IGBT) for children with selective mutism: A preliminary randomized clinical trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 87(8), 720–733. View study →

Kovac, L. M., and Furr, J. M. (2018). What Teachers Should Know About Selective Mutism in Early Childhood. Early Childhood Education Journal, 47(1), 107–114. View study →

Oerbeck, B., Overgaard, K. R., Stein, M. B., Pripp, A. H., and Kristensen, H. (2018). Treatment of selective mutism: a 5-year follow-up study. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 27(8), 997–1009. View study →

Steains, S. Y., Malouff, J. M., and Schutte, N. S. (2021). Efficacy of Psychological Interventions for Selective Mutism in Children: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Child: Care, Health and Development, 47(6), 771–781. View study →

‍

References cited in this article

American Academy of Pediatrics (2012). Policy Statement: Sensory Integration Therapies for Children With Developmental and Behavioral Disorders. Pediatrics, 129(6), 1186–1189.

American Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.

Black, B., and Uhde, T. W. (1995). Psychiatric characteristics of children with selective mutism. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34(7), 847–856.

Catchpole, R. E. H., Young, A., Baer, S., and Salih, T. (2019). Examining a novel, parent-child interaction therapy-informed, behavioral treatment of selective mutism. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 66, 102112.

Chavira, D. A., Shipon-Blum, E., Hitchcock, C., Cohan, S., and Stein, M. B. (2007). Selective Mutism and Social Anxiety Disorder. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 46(11), 1464–1472.

Cohan, S. L., Chavira, D. A., and Stein, M. B. (2006). Practitioner review: Psychosocial interventions for children with selective mutism. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47(11), 1085–1097.

Hipolito, G., Pagnamenta, E., Stacey, H., Wright, E., Joffe, V., Murayama, K., and Creswell, C. (2023). A systematic review and meta-analysis of nonpharmacological interventions for children and adolescents with selective mutism. JCPP Advances, 3(3), e12166.

Johnson, M., and Wintgens, A. (2017). The Selective Mutism Resource Manual (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.

Kagan, J. (1994). Galen's Prophecy: Temperament in Human Nature. New York: Basic Books.

Kamhi, A. G., and Wallach, G. P. (2012). Should We Believe the Validity of the Auditory Processing Disorder Diagnosis? Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 43(3), 265–272.

Østergaard, K. R. (2018). Treatment of selective mutism based on cognitive behavioural therapy, psychopharmacology and combination therapy. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 72(4), 240–250.

Rodrigues Pereira, C., Ensink, J. B. M., Guüldner, M. G., Lindauer, R. J. L., de Jongh, A., and Utens, E. M. W. J. (2020). Effectiveness of a behavioral treatment protocol for selective mutism in children. Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications, 20, 100650.

Shipon-Blum, E. (2010). When the Words Just Won't Come Out: Understanding Selective Mutism. Jenkintown, PA: Selective Mutism Anxiety Research and Treatment Center.

Zakszeski, B. N., and DuPaul, G. J. (2017). Reinforce, shape, expose, and fade: a review of treatments for selective mutism (2005–2015). School Mental Health, 9(1), 1–15.

‍

‍