217 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21361454)
1. Perceptual weighting of individual and concurrent cues for sentence intelligibility: frequency, envelope, and fine structure.
Fogerty D
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Feb; 129(2):977-88. PubMed ID: 21361454
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Perceptual weighting of the envelope and fine structure across frequency bands for sentence intelligibility: effect of interruption at the syllabic-rate and periodic-rate of speech.
Fogerty D
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jul; 130(1):489-500. PubMed ID: 21786914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A correlational method to concurrently measure envelope and temporal fine structure weights: effects of age, cochlear pathology, and spectral shaping.
Fogerty D; Humes LE
J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1679-89. PubMed ID: 22978896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Sentence perception in listening conditions having similar speech intelligibility indices.
Gustafson SJ; Pittman AL
Int J Audiol; 2011 Jan; 50(1):34-40. PubMed ID: 21047291
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. The relative importance of consonant and vowel segments to the recognition of words and sentences: effects of age and hearing loss.
Fogerty D; Kewley-Port D; Humes LE
J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1667-78. PubMed ID: 22978895
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Enhancement of speech intelligibility in reverberant rooms: role of amplitude envelope and temporal fine structure.
Srinivasan NK; Zahorik P
J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jun; 135(6):EL239-45. PubMed ID: 24907828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Role and relative contribution of temporal envelope and fine structure cues in sentence recognition by normal-hearing listeners.
Apoux F; Yoho SE; Youngdahl CL; Healy EW
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Sep; 134(3):2205-12. PubMed ID: 23967950
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Benefit of temporal fine structure to speech perception in noise measured with controlled temporal envelopes.
Eaves JM; Summerfield AQ; Kitterick PT
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jul; 130(1):501-7. PubMed ID: 21786915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Information-bearing acoustic change outperforms duration in predicting intelligibility of full-spectrum and noise-vocoded sentences.
Stilp CE
J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Mar; 135(3):1518-29. PubMed ID: 24606287
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Importance of temporal-envelope speech cues in different spectral regions.
Ardoint M; Agus T; Sheft S; Lorenzi C
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Aug; 130(2):EL115-21. PubMed ID: 21877769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The Influence of Noise Reduction on Speech Intelligibility, Response Times to Speech, and Perceived Listening Effort in Normal-Hearing Listeners.
van den Tillaart-Haverkate M; de Ronde-Brons I; Dreschler WA; Houben R
Trends Hear; 2017; 21():2331216517716844. PubMed ID: 28656807
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Predicting speech intelligibility based on the signal-to-noise envelope power ratio after modulation-frequency selective processing.
Jørgensen S; Dau T
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Sep; 130(3):1475-87. PubMed ID: 21895088
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Signal envelope and speech intelligibility differentially impact auditory motion perception.
Warnecke M; Litovsky RY
Sci Rep; 2021 Jul; 11(1):15117. PubMed ID: 34302032
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Acoustic and perceptual effects of amplitude and frequency compression on high-frequency speech.
Alexander JM; Rallapalli V
J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Aug; 142(2):908. PubMed ID: 28863610
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Effects of fundamental frequency and vocal-tract length cues on sentence segregation by listeners with hearing loss.
Mackersie CL; Dewey J; Guthrie LA
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Aug; 130(2):1006-19. PubMed ID: 21877813
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The effects of selective consonant amplification on sentence recognition in noise by hearing-impaired listeners.
Saripella R; Loizou PC; Thibodeau L; Alford JA
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Nov; 130(5):3028-37. PubMed ID: 22087930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of fluctuating maskers for speech recognition tests.
Francart T; van Wieringen A; Wouters J
Int J Audiol; 2011 Jan; 50(1):2-13. PubMed ID: 21091261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Frequency specificity of amplitude envelope patterns in noise-vocoded speech.
Ueda K; Araki T; Nakajima Y
Hear Res; 2018 Sep; 367():169-181. PubMed ID: 29929750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
