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 *

156 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20968381)

  • 1. Factors influencing recognition of interrupted speech.
    Wang X; Humes LE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Oct; 128(4):2100-11. PubMed ID: 20968381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Contribution of consonant landmarks to speech recognition in simulated acoustic-electric hearing.
    Chen F; Loizou PC
    Ear Hear; 2010 Apr; 31(2):259-67. PubMed ID: 20081538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Perception of interrupted speech: cross-rate variation in the intelligibility of gated and concatenated sentences.
    Shafiro V; Sheft S; Risley R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Aug; 130(2):EL108-14. PubMed ID: 21877768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Acoustic predictors of intelligibility for segmentally interrupted speech: temporal envelope, voicing, and duration.
    Fogerty D
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2013 Oct; 56(5):1402-8. PubMed ID: 23838986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Word recognition for temporally and spectrally distorted materials: the effects of age and hearing loss.
    Smith SL; Pichora-Fuller MK; Wilson RH; Macdonald EN
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(3):349-66. PubMed ID: 22343546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Sentence intelligibility during segmental interruption and masking by speech-modulated noise: Effects of age and hearing loss.
    Fogerty D; Ahlstrom JB; Bologna WJ; Dubno JR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Jun; 137(6):3487-501. PubMed ID: 26093436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Perception of interrupted speech: effects of dual-rate gating on the intelligibility of words and sentences.
    Shafiro V; Sheft S; Risley R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Oct; 130(4):2076-87. PubMed ID: 21973362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Acoustic changes in the production of lexical stress during Lombard speech.
    Arciuli J; Simpson BS; Vogel AP; Ballard KJ
    Lang Speech; 2014 Jun; 57(Pt 2):149-62. PubMed ID: 25102603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Recognition of temporally interrupted and spectrally degraded sentences with additional unprocessed low-frequency speech.
    Başkent D; Chatterjee M
    Hear Res; 2010 Dec; 270(1-2):127-33. PubMed ID: 20817081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Clear speech and lexical competition in younger and older adult listeners.
    Van Engen KJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Aug; 142(2):1067. PubMed ID: 28863602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The effects of the addition of low-level, low-noise noise on the intelligibility of sentences processed to remove temporal envelope information.
    Hopkins K; Moore BC; Stone MA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Oct; 128(4):2150-61. PubMed ID: 20968385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Phoneme recognition in vocoded maskers by normal-hearing and aided hearing-impaired listeners.
    Phatak SA; Grant KW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Aug; 136(2):859-66. PubMed ID: 25096119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effects of age and hearing loss on the intelligibility of interrupted speech.
    Shafiro V; Sheft S; Risley R; Gygi B
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Feb; 137(2):745-56. PubMed ID: 25698009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Processing of no-release variants in connected speech.
    LoCasto PC; Connine CM
    Lang Speech; 2011 Jun; 54(Pt 2):181-97. PubMed ID: 21848079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A comparison of recognition performances in speech-spectrum noise by listeners with normal hearing on PB-50, CID W-22, NU-6, W-1 spondaic words, and monosyllabic digits spoken by the same speaker.
    Wilson RH; McArdle R; Roberts H
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2008 Jun; 19(6):496-506. PubMed ID: 19253782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Recognition of accented English in quiet by younger normal-hearing listeners and older listeners with normal-hearing and hearing loss.
    Gordon-Salant S; Yeni-Komshian GH; Fitzgibbons PJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Jul; 128(1):444-55. PubMed ID: 20649238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effect of training rate on recognition of spectrally shifted speech.
    Nogaki G; Fu QJ; Galvin JJ
    Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2):132-40. PubMed ID: 17496666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Perception of temporally modified speech in auditory neuropathy.
    Hassan DM
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Jan; 50(1):41-9. PubMed ID: 21047293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The role of linguistic and indexical information in improved recognition of dysarthric speech.
    Borrie SA; McAuliffe MJ; Liss JM; O'Beirne GA; Anderson TJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Jan; 133(1):474-82. PubMed ID: 23297919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Dichotic speech recognition using CVC word and nonsense CVC syllable stimuli.
    Findlen UM; Roup CM
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2011 Jan; 22(1):13-22. PubMed ID: 21419066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.