1265 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21826004)
1. The influence of semantically related and unrelated text cues on the intelligibility of sentences in noise.
Zekveld AA; Rudner M; Johnsrude IS; Festen JM; van Beek JH; Rönnberg J
Ear Hear; 2011; 32(6):e16-25. PubMed ID: 21826004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Pupil response as an indication of effortful listening: the influence of sentence intelligibility.
Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Festen JM
Ear Hear; 2010 Aug; 31(4):480-90. PubMed ID: 20588118
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Cognitive load during speech perception in noise: the influence of age, hearing loss, and cognition on the pupil response.
Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Festen JM
Ear Hear; 2011; 32(4):498-510. PubMed ID: 21233711
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Development of the Listening in Spatialized Noise-Sentences Test (LISN-S).
Cameron S; Dillon H
Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2):196-211. PubMed ID: 17496671
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The effects of working memory capacity and semantic cues on the intelligibility of speech in noise.
Zekveld AA; Rudner M; Johnsrude IS; Rönnberg J
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Sep; 134(3):2225-34. PubMed ID: 23967952
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. In a Concurrent Memory and Auditory Perception Task, the Pupil Dilation Response Is More Sensitive to Memory Load Than to Auditory Stimulus Characteristics.
Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Rönnberg J; Rudner M
Ear Hear; 2019; 40(2):272-286. PubMed ID: 29923867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The benefit obtained from visually displayed text from an automatic speech recognizer during listening to speech presented in noise.
Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Kessens JM; Vlaming MS; Houtgast T
Ear Hear; 2008 Dec; 29(6):838-52. PubMed ID: 18633325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Pupil dilation uncovers extra listening effort in the presence of a single-talker masker.
Koelewijn T; Zekveld AA; Festen JM; Kramer SE
Ear Hear; 2012; 33(2):291-300. PubMed ID: 21921797
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Behavioral and fMRI evidence that cognitive ability modulates the effect of semantic context on speech intelligibility.
Zekveld AA; Rudner M; Johnsrude IS; Heslenfeld DJ; Rönnberg J
Brain Lang; 2012 Aug; 122(2):103-13. PubMed ID: 22728131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The influence of age, hearing, and working memory on the speech comprehension benefit derived from an automatic speech recognition system.
Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Kessens JM; Vlaming MS; Houtgast T
Ear Hear; 2009 Apr; 30(2):262-72. PubMed ID: 19194286
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Development and evaluation of the listening in spatialized noise test.
Cameron S; Dillon H; Newall P
Ear Hear; 2006 Feb; 27(1):30-42. PubMed ID: 16446563
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Speech-in-speech listening on the LiSN-S test by older adults with good audiograms depends on cognition and hearing acuity at high frequencies.
Besser J; Festen JM; Goverts ST; Kramer SE; Pichora-Fuller MK
Ear Hear; 2015 Jan; 36(1):24-41. PubMed ID: 25207850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The Effect of Signal-to-Noise Ratio on Linguistic Processing in a Semantic Judgment Task: An Aging Study.
Stanley N; Davis T; Estis J
J Am Acad Audiol; 2017 Mar; 28(3):209-221. PubMed ID: 28277212
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Polish sentence matrix test for speech intelligibility measurement in noise.
Ozimek E; Warzybok A; Kutzner D
Int J Audiol; 2010 Jun; 49(6):444-54. PubMed ID: 20482292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. How does linguistic complexity influence intelligibility in a German audiometric sentence intelligibility test?
Uslar V; Ruigendijk E; Hamann C; Brand T; Kollmeier B
Int J Audiol; 2011 Sep; 50(9):621-31. PubMed ID: 21714708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Speech intelligibility and passive, level-dependent earplugs.
Norin JA; Emanuel DC; Letowski TR
Ear Hear; 2011; 32(5):642-9. PubMed ID: 21407078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Task difficulty differentially affects two measures of processing load: the pupil response during sentence processing and delayed cued recall of the sentences.
Zekveld AA; Festen JM; Kramer SE
J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2013 Aug; 56(4):1156-65. PubMed ID: 23785182
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Advantages of binaural hearing provided through bimodal stimulation via a cochlear implant and a conventional hearing aid: a 6-month comparative study.
Morera C; Manrique M; Ramos A; Garcia-Ibanez L; Cavalle L; Huarte A; Castillo C; Estrada E
Acta Otolaryngol; 2005 Jun; 125(6):596-606. PubMed ID: 16076708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Event-related brain potentials during the monitoring of speech errors.
Schiller NO; Horemans I; Ganushchak L; Koester D
Neuroimage; 2009 Jan; 44(2):520-30. PubMed ID: 18930155
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Combined effects of noise and reverberation on speech recognition performance of normal-hearing children and adults.
Neuman AC; Wroblewski M; Hajicek J; Rubinstein A
Ear Hear; 2010 Jun; 31(3):336-44. PubMed ID: 20215967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
