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.
97 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19163326)
21. On the controversy about the sharpness of human cochlear tuning. Lopez-Poveda EA; Eustaquio-Martin A J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2013 Oct; 14(5):673-86. PubMed ID: 23690279 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Derived acoustically evoked brainstem responses by means of narrow-band and notched-noise masking in normal-hearing subjects. Thümmler I; Tietze G Scand Audiol; 1984; 13(2):129-37. PubMed ID: 6463552 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Effects of cochlear impairment and equivalent-threshold masking on psychoacoustic tuning curves. Florentine M Audiology; 1992; 31(5):241-53. PubMed ID: 1449429 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Auditory suppression and frequency selectivity in older and younger adults. Sommers MS; Gehr SE J Acoust Soc Am; 1998 Feb; 103(2):1067-74. PubMed ID: 9479760 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. No Effect of Musical Training on Frequency Selectivity Estimated Using Three Methods. Moore BCJ; Wan J; Varathanathan A; Naddell S; Baer T Trends Hear; 2019; 23():2331216519841980. PubMed ID: 31081487 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Auditory models of suprathreshold distortion and speech intelligibility in persons with impaired hearing. Bernstein JG; Summers V; Grassi E; Grant KW J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Apr; 24(4):307-28. PubMed ID: 23636211 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. An objective assessment method for frequency selectivity of the human auditory system. Gong Q; Wang Y; Xian M Biomed Eng Online; 2014 Dec; 13():171. PubMed ID: 25522838 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Distortion product otoacoustic emission of symphony orchestra musicians before and after rehearsal. Reuter K; Hammershøi D J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Jan; 121(1):327-36. PubMed ID: 17297787 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Refining the measurement of psychophysical tuning curves. Moore BC; Glasberg BR; Roberts B J Acoust Soc Am; 1984 Oct; 76(4):1057-66. PubMed ID: 6501701 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Comparison of the roex and gammachirp filters as representations of the auditory filter. Unoki M; Irino T; Glasberg B; Moore BC; Patterson RD J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Sep; 120(3):1474-92. PubMed ID: 17004470 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Wavelet and matching pursuit estimates of the transient-evoked otoacoustic emission latency. Notaro G; Al-Maamury AM; Moleti A; Sisto R J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Dec; 122(6):3576-85. PubMed ID: 18247765 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Broadened forward-masked tuning curves from intense masking tones: delay-time and probe-level manipulations. Nelson DA; Freyman RL J Acoust Soc Am; 1984 May; 75(5):1570-7. PubMed ID: 6736419 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Frequency discrimination at 1200 Hz in the presence of high-frequency masking noise. Nelson DA; Stanton ME J Acoust Soc Am; 1982 Mar; 71(3):660-4. PubMed ID: 7085971 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Effect of Energy Equalization on the Intelligibility of Speech in Fluctuating Background Interference for Listeners With Hearing Impairment. D'Aquila LA; Desloge JG; Reed CM; Braida LD Trends Hear; 2017; 21():2331216517710354. PubMed ID: 28602128 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Level dependence of auditory filters in nonsimultaneous masking as a function of frequency. Oxenham AJ; Simonson AM J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Jan; 119(1):444-53. PubMed ID: 16454299 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]