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 *

197 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20675792)

  • 41. Listening with eye and hand: cross-modal contributions to speech perception.
    Fowler CA; Dekle DJ
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1991 Aug; 17(3):816-28. PubMed ID: 1834793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Variability and stability in the McGurk effect: contributions of participants, stimuli, time, and response type.
    Mallick DB; Magnotti JF; Beauchamp MS
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2015 Oct; 22(5):1299-307. PubMed ID: 25802068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Early integration of vowel and pitch processing: a mismatch negativity study.
    Lidji P; Jolicoeur P; Kolinsky R; Moreau P; Connolly JF; Peretz I
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2010 Apr; 121(4):533-41. PubMed ID: 20071227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. 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]  

  • 45. The impact of strong assimilation on the perception of connected speech.
    Gaskell MG; Snoeren ND
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2008 Dec; 34(6):1632-47. PubMed ID: 19045997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Cross-modal facilitation in speech prosody.
    Foxton JM; Riviere LD; Barone P
    Cognition; 2010 Apr; 115(1):71-8. PubMed ID: 20015487
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Pitch modulates lexical identification in spoken word recognition: ERP and behavioral evidence.
    Friedrich CK; Kotz SA; Friederici AD; Alter K
    Brain Res Cogn Brain Res; 2004 Jul; 20(2):300-8. PubMed ID: 15183401
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Linguistic experience and audio-visual perception of non-native fricatives.
    Wang Y; Behne DM; Jiang H
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Sep; 124(3):1716-26. PubMed ID: 19045662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. The influence of selective attention to auditory and visual speech on the integration of audiovisual speech information.
    Buchan JN; Munhall KG
    Perception; 2011; 40(10):1164-82. PubMed ID: 22308887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Audiovisual integration as conflict resolution: The conflict of the McGurk illusion.
    Morís Fernández L; Macaluso E; Soto-Faraco S
    Hum Brain Mapp; 2017 Nov; 38(11):5691-5705. PubMed ID: 28792094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. 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]  

  • 52. Rhythmic versus phonemic interference in delayed auditory feedback.
    Kaspar K; Rübeling H
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2011 Jun; 54(3):932-43. PubMed ID: 20966383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Integration of facial and newly learned visual cues in speech perception.
    Massaro D; Cohen MM; Meyer H; Stribling T; Sterling C; Vanderhyden S
    Am J Psychol; 2011; 124(3):341-54. PubMed ID: 21977695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. What accounts for individual differences in susceptibility to the McGurk effect?
    Brown VA; Hedayati M; Zanger A; Mayn S; Ray L; Dillman-Hasso N; Strand JF
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(11):e0207160. PubMed ID: 30418995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. The McGurk effect in the time of pandemic: Age-dependent adaptation to an environmental loss of visual speech cues.
    Chládková K; Podlipský VJ; Nudga N; Šimáčková Š
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2021 Jun; 28(3):992-1002. PubMed ID: 33443708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Skilled musicians are not subject to the McGurk effect.
    Proverbio AM; Massetti G; Rizzi E; Zani A
    Sci Rep; 2016 Jul; 6():30423. PubMed ID: 27453363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Crossmodal and incremental perception of audiovisual cues to emotional speech.
    Barkhuysen P; Krahmer E; Swerts M
    Lang Speech; 2010; 53(Pt 1):3-30. PubMed ID: 20415000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Neuropsychological studies of auditory-visual fusion illusions. Four case studies and their implications.
    Campbell R; Garwood J; Franklin S; Howard D; Landis T; Regard M
    Neuropsychologia; 1990; 28(8):787-802. PubMed ID: 1701035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Children use visual speech to compensate for non-intact auditory speech.
    Jerger S; Damian MF; Tye-Murray N; Abdi H
    J Exp Child Psychol; 2014 Oct; 126():295-312. PubMed ID: 24974346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Perceptual congruency of audio-visual speech affects ventriloquism with bilateral visual stimuli.
    Kanaya S; Yokosawa K
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2011 Feb; 18(1):123-8. PubMed ID: 21327355
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.