321 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19173112)
1. The perception of prosody and speaker gender in normal-hearing listeners and cochlear implant recipients.
Meister H; Landwehr M; Pyschny V; Walger M; von Wedel H
Int J Audiol; 2009 Jan; 48(1):38-48. PubMed ID: 19173112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Advantage of bimodal fitting in prosody perception for children using a cochlear implant and a hearing aid.
Straatman LV; Rietveld AC; Beijen J; Mylanus EA; Mens LH
J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Oct; 128(4):1884-95. PubMed ID: 20968360
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Production and perception of speech intonation in pediatric cochlear implant recipients and individuals with normal hearing.
Peng SC; Tomblin JB; Turner CW
Ear Hear; 2008 Jun; 29(3):336-51. PubMed ID: 18344873
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Perception of vowels and prosody by cochlear implant recipients in noise.
Van Zyl M; Hanekom JJ
J Commun Disord; 2013; 46(5-6):449-64. PubMed ID: 24157128
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The perception of sentence stress in cochlear implant recipients.
Meister H; Landwehr M; Pyschny V; Wagner P; Walger M
Ear Hear; 2011; 32(4):459-67. PubMed ID: 21187749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The Use of Voice Cues for Speaker Gender Recognition in Cochlear Implant Recipients.
Meister H; Fürsen K; Streicher B; Lang-Roth R; Walger M
J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2016 Jun; 59(3):546-56. PubMed ID: 27135985
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Speech prosody perception in cochlear implant users with and without residual hearing.
Marx M; James C; Foxton J; Capber A; Fraysse B; Barone P; Deguine O
Ear Hear; 2015; 36(2):239-48. PubMed ID: 25303861
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Intelligibility of interrupted and interleaved speech for normal-hearing listeners and cochlear implantees.
Gnansia D; Pressnitzer D; Péan V; Meyer B; Lorenzi C
Hear Res; 2010 Jun; 265(1-2):46-53. PubMed ID: 20197084
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Weighting of cues for fricative place of articulation perception by children wearing cochlear implants.
Hedrick M; Bahng J; von Hapsburg D; Younger MS
Int J Audiol; 2011 Aug; 50(8):540-7. PubMed ID: 21604957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Fundamental frequency information for speech recognition via bimodal stimulation: cochlear implant in one ear and hearing aid in the other.
Shpak T; Most T; Luntz M
Ear Hear; 2014; 35(1):97-109. PubMed ID: 24141594
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Effects of various electrode configurations on music perception, intonation and speaker gender identification.
Landwehr M; Fürstenberg D; Walger M; von Wedel H; Meister H
Cochlear Implants Int; 2014 Jan; 15(1):27-35. PubMed ID: 23684531
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The perception of intonation questions and statements in Cantonese.
Ma JK; Ciocca V; Whitehill TL
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Feb; 129(2):1012-23. PubMed ID: 21361457
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The effect of cochlear implantation on music perception by adults with usable pre-operative acoustic hearing.
Looi V; McDermott H; McKay C; Hickson L
Int J Audiol; 2008 May; 47(5):257-68. PubMed ID: 18465410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Vowel identification by cochlear implant users: contributions of static and dynamic spectral cues.
Donaldson GS; Rogers CL; Cardenas ES; Russell BA; Hanna NH
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Oct; 134(4):3021-8. PubMed ID: 24116437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. BKB-SIN and ANL predict perceived communication ability in cochlear implant users.
Donaldson GS; Chisolm TH; Blasco GP; Shinnick LJ; Ketter KJ; Krause JC
Ear Hear; 2009 Aug; 30(4):401-10. PubMed ID: 19390441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Musical background not associated with self-perceived hearing performance or speech perception in postlingual cochlear-implant users.
Fuller C; Free R; Maat B; Başkent D
J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Aug; 132(2):1009-16. PubMed ID: 22894221
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Impact of low-frequency hearing.
Büchner A; Schüssler M; Battmer RD; Stöver T; Lesinski-Schiedat A; Lenarz T
Audiol Neurootol; 2009; 14 Suppl 1():8-13. PubMed ID: 19390170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Development of a speaker discrimination test for cochlear implant users based on the Oldenburg Logatome corpus.
Mühler R; Ziese M; Rostalski D
ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec; 2009; 71(1):14-20. PubMed ID: 18946229
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. What breaks a melody: perceiving F0 and intensity sequences with a cochlear implant.
Cousineau M; Demany L; Meyer B; Pressnitzer D
Hear Res; 2010 Oct; 269(1-2):34-41. PubMed ID: 20674733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Cortical neural activity underlying speech perception in postlingual adult cochlear implant recipients.
Henkin Y; Tetin-Schneider S; Hildesheimer M; Kishon-Rabin L
Audiol Neurootol; 2009; 14(1):39-53. PubMed ID: 18781063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
