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 *

105 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2232762)

  • 1. Recognition of voiceless fricatives by normal and hearing-impaired subjects.
    Zeng FG; Turner CW
    J Speech Hear Res; 1990 Sep; 33(3):440-9. PubMed ID: 2232762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Perception of voiceless fricatives by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired children and adults.
    Pittman AL; Stelmachowicz PG
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2000 Dec; 43(6):1389-401. PubMed ID: 11193960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effects of vowel context on the recognition of initial and medial consonants by cochlear implant users.
    Donaldson GS; Kreft HA
    Ear Hear; 2006 Dec; 27(6):658-77. PubMed ID: 17086077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Audibility and recognition of stop consonants in normal and hearing-impaired subjects.
    Turner CW; Robb MP
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1987 May; 81(5):1566-73. PubMed ID: 3584694
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Labeling of /s/ and [see text] by listeners with normal and impaired hearing, revisited.
    Hedrick MS; Younger MS
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2003 Jun; 46(3):636-48. PubMed ID: 14696991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effect of acoustic cues on labeling fricatives and affricates.
    Hedrick M
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 1997 Aug; 40(4):925-38. PubMed ID: 9263955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Perceptual cues to the voiced-voiceless distinction of final fricatives for listeners with impaired or with normal hearing.
    Revoile SG; Holden-Pitt L; Pickett JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1985 Mar; 77(3):1263-5. PubMed ID: 3980876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Acoustic-phonetic context considerations for speech recognition testing of hearing-impaired listeners.
    Revoile S; Kozma-Spytek L; Holden-Pitt L; Pickett J; Droge J
    Ear Hear; 1995 Jun; 16(3):254-62. PubMed ID: 7672474
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Speech cue enhancement for the hearing impaired: I. Altered vowel durations for perception of final fricative voicing.
    Revoile SG; Holden-Pitt L; Pickett JM; Brandt F
    J Speech Hear Res; 1986 Jun; 29(2):240-55. PubMed ID: 3724117
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effect of relative amplitude and formant transitions on perception of place of articulation by adult listeners with cochlear implants.
    Hedrick MS; Carney AE
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 1997 Dec; 40(6):1445-57. PubMed ID: 9430763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Closed-set effects in consonant confusion patterns.
    Bell TS; Dirks DD; Kincaid GE
    J Speech Hear Res; 1989 Dec; 32(4):944-8. PubMed ID: 2601323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Perceptual weighting of stop consonant cues by normal and impaired listeners in reverberation versus noise.
    Hedrick MS; Younger MS
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Apr; 50(2):254-69. PubMed ID: 17463228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Airflow characteristics of fricative consonants produced by normally hearing and hearing-impaired speakers.
    Whitehead RL; Barefoot SM
    J Speech Hear Res; 1983 Jun; 26(2):185-94. PubMed ID: 6887804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Effect of relative and overall amplitude on perception of voiceless stop consonants by listeners with normal and impaired hearing.
    Hedrick MS; Schulte L; Jesteadt W
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1995 Sep; 98(3):1292-303. PubMed ID: 7560503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effect of relative amplitude, presentation level, and vowel duration on perception of voiceless stop consonants by normal and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Hedrick MS; Jesteadt W
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1996 Nov; 100(5):3398-407. PubMed ID: 8914319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The role of consonant-vowel amplitude ratio in the recognition of voiceless stop consonants by listeners with hearing impairment.
    Sammeth CA; Dorman MF; Stearns CJ
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 1999 Feb; 42(1):42-55. PubMed ID: 10025542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Consonant recognition for spectrally degraded speech as a function of consonant-vowel intensity ratio.
    Balakrishnan U; Freyman RL; Chiang YC; Nerbonne GP; Shea KJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1996 Jun; 99(6):3758-69. PubMed ID: 8655807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. High-frequency audibility: benefits for hearing-impaired listeners.
    Hogan CA; Turner CW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1998 Jul; 104(1):432-41. PubMed ID: 9670535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Formant transition duration and speech recognition in normal and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Turner CW; Smith SJ; Aldridge PL; Stewart SL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1997 May; 101(5 Pt 1):2822-5. PubMed ID: 9165736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of frequency selectivity and consonant recognition among hearing-impaired and masked normal-hearing listeners.
    Dubno JR; Schaefer AB
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1992 Apr; 91(4 Pt 1):2110-21. PubMed ID: 1597602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.