628 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23967952)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. The influence of informational masking on speech perception and pupil response in adults with hearing impairment.
Koelewijn T; Zekveld AA; Festen JM; Kramer SE
J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Mar; 135(3):1596-606. PubMed ID: 24606294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. How linguistic closure and verbal working memory relate to speech recognition in noise--a review.
Besser J; Koelewijn T; Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Festen JM
Trends Amplif; 2013 Jun; 17(2):75-93. PubMed ID: 23945955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Native and Non-native Speech Perception by Hearing-Impaired Listeners in Noise- and Speech Maskers.
Kilman L; Zekveld A; Hällgren M; Rönnberg J
Trends Hear; 2015 Apr; 19():. PubMed ID: 25910504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Voice segregation by difference in fundamental frequency: effect of masker type.
Deroche ML; Culling JF
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Nov; 134(5):EL465-70. PubMed ID: 24181992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Temporally pre-presented lipreading cues release speech from informational masking.
Wu C; Cao S; Wu X; Li L
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Apr; 133(4):EL281-5. PubMed ID: 23556692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Does it take older adults longer than younger adults to perceptually segregate a speech target from a background masker?
Ben-David BM; Tse VY; Schneider BA
Hear Res; 2012 Aug; 290(1-2):55-63. PubMed ID: 22609772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Age-related changes in listening effort for various types of masker noises.
Desjardins JL; Doherty KA
Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):261-72. PubMed ID: 23095723
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Influence of noise type on speech reception thresholds across four languages measured with matrix sentence tests.
Hochmuth S; Kollmeier B; Brand T; Jürgens T
Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():62-70. PubMed ID: 26097982
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The Contribution of Individual Differences in Memory Span and Language Ability to Spatial Release From Masking in Young Children.
MacCutcheon D; Pausch F; Füllgrabe C; Eccles R; van der Linde J; Panebianco C; Fels J; Ljung R
J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2019 Oct; 62(10):3741-3751. PubMed ID: 31619115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Talker- and language-specific effects on speech intelligibility in noise assessed with bilingual talkers: Which language is more robust against noise and reverberation?
Hochmuth S; Jürgens T; Brand T; Kollmeier B
Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():23-34. PubMed ID: 26486466
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Psychometric functions for sentence recognition in sinusoidally amplitude-modulated noises.
Shen Y; Manzano NK; Richards VM
J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Dec; 138(6):3613-24. PubMed ID: 26723318
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Speech recognition in fluctuating and continuous maskers: effects of hearing loss and presentation level.
Summers V; Molis MR
J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2004 Apr; 47(2):245-56. PubMed ID: 15157127
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Speech recognition in one- and two-talker maskers in school-age children and adults: Development of perceptual masking and glimpsing.
Buss E; Leibold LJ; Porter HL; Grose JH
J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Apr; 141(4):2650. PubMed ID: 28464682
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Recognition memory in noise for speech of varying intelligibility.
Gilbert RC; Chandrasekaran B; Smiljanic R
J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jan; 135(1):389-99. PubMed ID: 24437779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
