These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

251 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1780200)

  • 1. Integrating speech information across talkers, gender, and sensory modality: female faces and male voices in the McGurk effect.
    Green KP; Kuhl PK; Meltzoff AN; Stevens EB
    Percept Psychophys; 1991 Dec; 50(6):524-36. PubMed ID: 1780200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A Causal Inference Model Explains Perception of the McGurk Effect and Other Incongruent Audiovisual Speech.
    Magnotti JF; Beauchamp MS
    PLoS Comput Biol; 2017 Feb; 13(2):e1005229. PubMed ID: 28207734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The role of visual information in the processing of place and manner features in speech perception.
    Green KP; Kuhl PK
    Percept Psychophys; 1989 Jan; 45(1):34-42. PubMed ID: 2913568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Stimulus variability and processing dependencies in speech perception.
    Mullennix JW; Pisoni DB
    Percept Psychophys; 1990 Apr; 47(4):379-90. PubMed ID: 2345691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Facial identity and facial speech processing: familiar faces and voices in the McGurk effect.
    Walker S; Bruce V; O'Malley C
    Percept Psychophys; 1995 Nov; 57(8):1124-33. PubMed ID: 8539088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. McGurk effect in non-English listeners: few visual effects for Japanese subjects hearing Japanese syllables of high auditory intelligibility.
    Sekiyama K; Tohkura Y
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1991 Oct; 90(4 Pt 1):1797-805. PubMed ID: 1960275
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Processing of changes in visual speech in the human auditory cortex.
    Möttönen R; Krause CM; Tiippana K; Sams M
    Brain Res Cogn Brain Res; 2002 May; 13(3):417-25. PubMed ID: 11919005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Listener sensitivity to individual talker differences in voice-onset-time.
    Allen JS; Miller JL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2004 Jun; 115(6):3171-83. PubMed ID: 15237841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Gaze behavior in audiovisual speech perception: the influence of ocular fixations on the McGurk effect.
    Paré M; Richler RC; ten Hove M; Munhall KG
    Percept Psychophys; 2003 May; 65(4):553-67. PubMed ID: 12812278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The unity hypothesis revisited: can the male/female incongruent McGurk effect be disrupted by familiarization and priming?
    Ma KST; Schnupp JWH
    Front Psychol; 2023; 14():1106562. PubMed ID: 37705948
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Audio-visual integration in noise: Influence of auditory and visual stimulus degradation on eye movements and perception of the McGurk effect.
    Stacey JE; Howard CJ; Mitra S; Stacey PC
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2020 Oct; 82(7):3544-3557. PubMed ID: 32533526
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Visual and audiovisual speech perception with color and gray-scale facial images.
    Jordan TR; McCotter MV; Thomas SM
    Percept Psychophys; 2000 Oct; 62(7):1394-404. PubMed ID: 11143451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Some consequences of stimulus variability on speech processing by 2-month-old infants.
    Jusczyk PW; Pisoni DB; Mullennix J
    Cognition; 1992 Jun; 43(3):253-91. PubMed ID: 1643815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Spatial alignment between faces and voices improves selective attention to audio-visual speech.
    Fleming JT; Maddox RK; Shinn-Cunningham BG
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2021 Oct; 150(4):3085. PubMed ID: 34717460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Joint population coding and temporal coherence link an attended talker's voice and location features in naturalistic multi-talker scenes.
    van der Heijden K; Patel P; Bickel S; Herrero JL; Mehta AD; Mesgarani N
    bioRxiv; 2024 May; ():. PubMed ID: 38798551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A link between individual differences in multisensory speech perception and eye movements.
    Gurler D; Doyle N; Walker E; Magnotti J; Beauchamp M
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2015 May; 77(4):1333-41. PubMed ID: 25810157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effects of invisible lip movements on phonetic perception.
    Teramoto W; Ernst MO
    Sci Rep; 2023 Apr; 13(1):6478. PubMed ID: 37081084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. "Paying" attention to audiovisual speech: Do incongruent stimuli incur greater costs?
    Brown VA; Strand JF
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2019 Aug; 81(6):1743-1756. PubMed ID: 31197661
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Talker familiarity and the accommodation of talker variability.
    Magnuson JS; Nusbaum HC; Akahane-Yamada R; Saltzman D
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2021 May; 83(4):1842-1860. PubMed ID: 33398658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Mouth and Voice: A Relationship between Visual and Auditory Preference in the Human Superior Temporal Sulcus.
    Zhu LL; Beauchamp MS
    J Neurosci; 2017 Mar; 37(10):2697-2708. PubMed ID: 28179553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.