197 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18664707)
1. Rasch analysis of word identification and magnitude estimation scaling responses in measuring naive listeners' judgments of speech intelligibility of children with severe-to-profound hearing impairments.
Beltyukova SA; Stone GM; Ellis LW
J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2008 Oct; 51(5):1124-37. PubMed ID: 18664707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effects of training on naïve listeners' judgments of the speech intelligibility of children with severe-to-profound hearing loss.
Ellis LW; Beltyukova SA
J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2008 Oct; 51(5):1114-23. PubMed ID: 18664708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Reliability, sensitivity and validity of magnitude estimation, category scaling and paired-comparison judgements of speech intelligibility by older listeners.
Purdy SC; Pavlovic CV
Audiology; 1992; 31(5):254-71. PubMed ID: 1482505
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Sophisticated and naïve listeners' magnitude estimation scaling judgments of speech intelligibility and speech annoyance.
Ellis LW; Fucci D
Percept Mot Skills; 2000 Jun; 90(3 Pt 2):1231-4. PubMed ID: 10939074
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Magnitude estimation and categorical rating scaling in social sciences: a theoretical and psychometric controversy.
Beltyukova SA; Stone GE; Fox CM
J Appl Meas; 2008; 9(2):151-9. PubMed ID: 18480511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Effects of listeners' experience on two measures of intelligibility.
Ellis LW; Fucci DJ
Percept Mot Skills; 1992 Jun; 74(3 Pt 2):1099-104. PubMed ID: 1501975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Perception of clear fricatives by normal-hearing and simulated hearing-impaired listeners.
Maniwa K; Jongman A; Wade T
J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Feb; 123(2):1114-25. PubMed ID: 18247912
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Magnitude estimation scaling judgments of speech intelligibility and speech acceptability.
Ellis LW
Percept Mot Skills; 1999 Apr; 88(2):625-30. PubMed ID: 10483655
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. An experimental study using Rasch analysis to compare absolute magnitude estimation and categorical rating scaling as applied in survey research.
Koskey KL; Sondergeld TA; Beltyukova SA; Fox CM
J Appl Meas; 2013; 14(3):262-81. PubMed ID: 23816614
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Judgments of speech intelligibility and speech annoyance by mothers of children who are deaf or hard of hearing.
Ellis LW; Pakulski L
Percept Mot Skills; 2003 Feb; 96(1):324-8. PubMed ID: 12705540
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Magnitude-estimation scaling of speech intelligibility: effects of listeners' experience and semantic-syntactic context.
Ellis LW; Fucci DJ
Percept Mot Skills; 1991 Aug; 73(1):295-305. PubMed ID: 1945708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Scaling of voice pleasantness and acceptability in tracheoesophageal speakers.
Eadie TL; Doyle PC
J Voice; 2005 Sep; 19(3):373-83. PubMed ID: 16102664
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Reliability and clinical relevance of segmental analysis based on intelligibility assessment.
Van Nuffelen G; De Bodt M; Guns C; Wuyts F; Van de Heyning P
Folia Phoniatr Logop; 2008; 60(5):264-8. PubMed ID: 18781075
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Development of speech intelligibility and narrative abilities and their interrelationship three and five years after paediatric cochlear implantation.
Huttunen K
Int J Audiol; 2008 Nov; 47 Suppl 2():S38-46. PubMed ID: 19012111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Intelligibility, listening difficulty and listening efficiency in auralized classrooms.
Prodi N; Visentin C; Farnetani A
J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Jul; 128(1):172-81. PubMed ID: 20649212
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effects of noise and distortion on speech quality judgments in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
Arehart KH; Kates JM; Anderson MC; Harvey LO
J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Aug; 122(2):1150-64. PubMed ID: 17672661
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Binaural intelligibility prediction based on the speech transmission index.
van Wijngaarden SJ; Drullman R
J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Jun; 123(6):4514-23. PubMed ID: 18537400
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Subjective and objective effects of fast and slow compression on the perception of reverberant speech in listeners with hearing loss.
Shi LF; Doherty KA
J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2008 Oct; 51(5):1328-40. PubMed ID: 18664685
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Test-retest reliability of the Freiburg monosyllabic speech test].
Winkler A; Holube I
HNO; 2016 Aug; 64(8):564-71. PubMed ID: 27286728
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of objective and subjective measures of speech intelligibility in elderly hearing-impaired listeners.
Cox RM; Alexander GC; Rivera IM
J Speech Hear Res; 1991 Aug; 34(4):904-15. PubMed ID: 1956197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
