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 *

151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18814469)

  • 1. It all sounds the same to me: sequential ERP and behavioral effects during pitch and harmonicity judgments.
    Dyson BJ; Alain C
    Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci; 2008 Sep; 8(3):329-43. PubMed ID: 18814469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Top-down effects can modify the initially stimulus-driven auditory organization.
    Sussman E; Winkler I; Huotilainen M; Ritter W; Näätänen R
    Brain Res Cogn Brain Res; 2002 May; 13(3):393-405. PubMed ID: 11919003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Is a change as good with a rest? Task-dependent effects of inter-trial contingency on concurrent sound segregation.
    Dyson BJ; Alain C
    Brain Res; 2008 Jan; 1189():135-44. PubMed ID: 18078900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Neural representation of concurrent harmonic sounds in monkey primary auditory cortex: implications for models of auditory scene analysis.
    Fishman YI; Steinschneider M; Micheyl C
    J Neurosci; 2014 Sep; 34(37):12425-43. PubMed ID: 25209282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Cortical representations sensitive to the number of perceived auditory objects emerge between 2 and 4 months of age: electrophysiological evidence.
    Folland NA; Butler BE; Payne JE; Trainor LJ
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2015 May; 27(5):1060-7. PubMed ID: 25436670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Discriminating male and female voices: differentiating pitch and gender.
    Latinus M; Taylor MJ
    Brain Topogr; 2012 Apr; 25(2):194-204. PubMed ID: 22080221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Pitch, harmonicity and concurrent sound segregation: psychoacoustical and neurophysiological findings.
    Micheyl C; Oxenham AJ
    Hear Res; 2010 Jul; 266(1-2):36-51. PubMed ID: 19788920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Enhanced mismatch negativity in harmonic compared with inharmonic sounds.
    Quiroga-Martinez DR; Basiński K; Nasielski J; Tillmann B; Brattico E; Cholvy F; Fornoni L; Vuust P; Caclin A
    Eur J Neurosci; 2022 Sep; 56(5):4583-4599. PubMed ID: 35833941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Contribution of harmonicity and location to auditory object formation in free field: evidence from event-related brain potentials.
    McDonald KL; Alain C
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2005 Sep; 118(3 Pt 1):1593-604. PubMed ID: 16240820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Sequential grouping of pure-tone percepts evoked by the segregation of components from a complex tone.
    Haywood NR; Roberts B
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2011 Aug; 37(4):1263-74. PubMed ID: 21517216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Newborn infants process pitch intervals.
    Stefanics G; Háden GP; Sziller I; Balázs L; Beke A; Winkler I
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2009 Feb; 120(2):304-8. PubMed ID: 19131275
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. EEG signatures accompanying auditory figure-ground segregation.
    Tóth B; Kocsis Z; Háden GP; Szerafin Á; Shinn-Cunningham BG; Winkler I
    Neuroimage; 2016 Nov; 141():108-119. PubMed ID: 27421185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Neural discrimination of nonprototypical chords in music experts and laymen: an MEG study.
    Brattico E; Pallesen KJ; Varyagina O; Bailey C; Anourova I; Järvenpää M; Eerola T; Tervaniemi M
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2009 Nov; 21(11):2230-44. PubMed ID: 18855547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Pitch expertise is not created equal: Cross-domain effects of musicianship and tone language experience on neural and behavioural discrimination of speech and music.
    Hutka S; Bidelman GM; Moreno S
    Neuropsychologia; 2015 May; 71():52-63. PubMed ID: 25797590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Musical training shapes neural responses to melodic and prosodic expectation.
    Zioga I; Di Bernardi Luft C; Bhattacharya J
    Brain Res; 2016 Nov; 1650():267-282. PubMed ID: 27622645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Selective attention to sound location or pitch studied with event-related brain potentials and magnetic fields.
    Degerman A; Rinne T; Särkkä AK; Salmi J; Alho K
    Eur J Neurosci; 2008 Jun; 27(12):3329-41. PubMed ID: 18598270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Tonal expectations influence early pitch processing.
    Marmel F; Perrin F; Tillmann B
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2011 Oct; 23(10):3095-104. PubMed ID: 21265601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Noise and pitch interact during the cortical segregation of concurrent speech.
    Bidelman GM; Yellamsetty A
    Hear Res; 2017 Aug; 351():34-44. PubMed ID: 28578876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Sound offset-related brain potentials show retained sensory processing, but increased cognitive control activity in older adults.
    Horváth J; Gaál ZA; Volosin M
    Neurobiol Aging; 2017 Sep; 57():232-246. PubMed ID: 28666708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Pitch and loudness matching of unmodulated and modulated stimuli in cochlear implantees.
    Vandali A; Sly D; Cowan R; van Hoesel R
    Hear Res; 2013 Aug; 302():32-49. PubMed ID: 23685148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.