697 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22874643)
1. Perceptual effects of noise reduction with respect to personal preference, speech intelligibility, and listening effort.
Brons I; Houben R; Dreschler WA
Ear Hear; 2013; 34(1):29-41. PubMed ID: 22874643
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effects of noise reduction on speech intelligibility, perceived listening effort, and personal preference in hearing-impaired listeners.
Brons I; Houben R; Dreschler WA
Trends Hear; 2014 Oct; 18():. PubMed ID: 25315377
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Effect of slow-acting wide dynamic range compression on measures of intelligibility and ratings of speech quality in simulated-loss listeners.
Rosengard PS; Payton KL; Braida LD
J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2005 Jun; 48(3):702-14. PubMed ID: 16197282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Acoustical and Perceptual Comparison of Noise Reduction and Compression in Hearing Aids.
Brons I; Houben R; Dreschler WA
J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2015 Aug; 58(4):1363-76. PubMed ID: 26090648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Effects of noise suppression on intelligibility: experts' opinions and naive normal-hearing listeners' performance.
Hilkhuysen GL; Gaubitch N; Huckvale M
J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2013 Apr; 56(2):404-15. PubMed ID: 23090965
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Speech-clarity judgments of hearing-aid-processed speech in noise: differing polar patterns and acoustic environments.
Amlani AM; Rakerd B; Punch JL
Int J Audiol; 2006 Jun; 45(6):319-30. PubMed ID: 16777778
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Audiovisual asynchrony detection and speech intelligibility in noise with moderate to severe sensorineural hearing impairment.
Başkent D; Bazo D
Ear Hear; 2011; 32(5):582-92. PubMed ID: 21389856
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparing Binaural Pre-processing Strategies III: Speech Intelligibility of Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Listeners.
Völker C; Warzybok A; Ernst SM
Trends Hear; 2015 Dec; 19():. PubMed ID: 26721922
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Using genetic algorithms with subjective input from human subjects: implications for fitting hearing aids and cochlear implants.
Başkent D; Eiler CL; Edwards B
Ear Hear; 2007 Jun; 28(3):370-80. PubMed ID: 17485986
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Evaluation of the sparse coding shrinkage noise reduction algorithm in normal hearing and hearing impaired listeners.
Sang J; Hu H; Zheng C; Li G; Lutman ME; Bleeck S
Hear Res; 2014 Apr; 310():36-47. PubMed ID: 24495441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effects of noise, nonlinear processing, and linear filtering on perceived speech quality.
Arehart KH; Kates JM; Anderson MC
Ear Hear; 2010 Jun; 31(3):420-36. PubMed ID: 20440116
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Improving word recognition in noise among hearing-impaired subjects with a single-channel cochlear noise-reduction algorithm.
Fink N; Furst M; Muchnik C
J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1718-31. PubMed ID: 22978899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. 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]
17. Effect of training on word-recognition performance in noise for young normal-hearing and older hearing-impaired listeners.
Burk MH; Humes LE; Amos NE; Strauser LE
Ear Hear; 2006 Jun; 27(3):263-78. PubMed ID: 16672795
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Perceptual consequences of different signal changes due to binaural noise reduction: do hearing loss and working memory capacity play a role?
Neher T; Grimm G; Hohmann V
Ear Hear; 2014; 35(5):e213-27. PubMed ID: 25010636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Speech quality evaluation of a sparse coding shrinkage noise reduction algorithm with normal hearing and hearing impaired listeners.
Sang J; Hu H; Zheng C; Li G; Lutman ME; Bleeck S
Hear Res; 2015 Sep; 327():175-85. PubMed ID: 26232529
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluation of a noise reduction method--comparison between observed scores and scores predicted from STI.
Ludvigsen C; Elberling C; Keidser G
Scand Audiol Suppl; 1993; 38():50-5. PubMed ID: 8153564
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
