Non-native speech is commonly riddled with disfluencies: pauses, uhm’s, corrections, etc. The presence of disfluencies in L2 speech has been demonstrated to strongly affect perceived fluency ratings as given by human raters. But native speakers also halt, uhm, correct or repeat themselves. The current study investigates the difference between the way fluency is assessed in native and non-native speech. Since natives portray less disfluencies in their speech than non-natives, they may therefore receive higher fluency ratings. Another possibility might be that natives are not only rated higher, but that their disfluencies are also weighed differently by fluency raters than non-native disfluencies. One possible reason for this may lie in differential psycholinguistic functions of native vs. non-native disfluencies. In two experiments raters were asked to judge the fluency of native and non-native Dutch speech that had been phonetically manipulated: in Experiment 1 the number and duration of silent pauses were manipulated, in Experiment 2 the speed of the speech was altered. The manipulated speech samples were presented to native listeners, who rated them on fluency using a 9-point Likert scale. Linear Mixed Models revealed that in both experiments (i) natives were rated higher than non-natives, (ii) increasing the number or the duration of silent pauses (Experiment 1) or slowing down the speech (Experiment 2) led to lower fluency judgments, and (iii) crucially, there was no difference in the effects of the manipulations across native and non-native speech. These results suggest that human raters judge the fluency characteristics of native and non-native speakers according to the same principles. The next step in our project is to study L1 and L2 fluency from the perspective of speech processing. Results from eye-tracking experiments focusing on the online processing of native and non-native disfluencies will be introduced.