292 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24116428)
1. Effect of mismatched place-of-stimulation on binaural fusion and lateralization in bilateral cochlear-implant users.
Kan A; Stoelb C; Litovsky RY; Goupell MJ
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Oct; 134(4):2923-36. PubMed ID: 24116428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effects of interaural pitch matching and auditory image centering on binaural sensitivity in cochlear implant users.
Kan A; Litovsky RY; Goupell MJ
Ear Hear; 2015; 36(3):e62-8. PubMed ID: 25565660
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Extent of lateralization at large interaural time differences in simulated electric hearing and bilateral cochlear implant users.
Baumgärtel RM; Hu H; Kollmeier B; Dietz M
J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Apr; 141(4):2338. PubMed ID: 28464641
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Mapping procedures can produce non-centered auditory images in bilateral cochlear implantees.
Goupell MJ; Kan A; Litovsky RY
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Feb; 133(2):EL101-7. PubMed ID: 23363188
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Effect of mismatched place-of-stimulation on the salience of binaural cues in conditions that simulate bilateral cochlear-implant listening.
Goupell MJ; Stoelb C; Kan A; Litovsky RY
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Apr; 133(4):2272-87. PubMed ID: 23556595
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparing sound localization deficits in bilateral cochlear-implant users and vocoder simulations with normal-hearing listeners.
Jones H; Kan A; Litovsky RY
Trends Hear; 2014 Nov; 18():. PubMed ID: 25385244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Spatial hearing benefits demonstrated with presentation of acoustic temporal fine structure cues in bilateral cochlear implant listeners.
Churchill TH; Kan A; Goupell MJ; Litovsky RY
J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Sep; 136(3):1246. PubMed ID: 25190398
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Interaural envelope correlation change discrimination in bilateral cochlear implantees: effects of mismatch, centering, and onset of deafness.
Goupell MJ
J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Mar; 137(3):1282-97. PubMed ID: 25786942
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Binaural hearing in children using Gaussian enveloped and transposed tones.
Ehlers E; Kan A; Winn MB; Stoelb C; Litovsky RY
J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Apr; 139(4):1724. PubMed ID: 27106319
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Contour identification with pitch and loudness cues using cochlear implants.
Luo X; Masterson ME; Wu CC
J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jan; 135(1):EL8-14. PubMed ID: 24437857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Investigating interaural frequency-place mismatches via bimodal vowel integration.
Guérit F; Santurette S; Chalupper J; Dau T
Trends Hear; 2014 Nov; 18():. PubMed ID: 25421087
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Simulating the effect of interaural mismatch in the insertion depth of bilateral cochlear implants on speech perception.
van Besouw RM; Forrester L; Crowe ND; Rowan D
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Aug; 134(2):1348-57. PubMed ID: 23927131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Interaural Place-of-Stimulation Mismatch Estimates Using CT Scans and Binaural Perception, But Not Pitch, Are Consistent in Cochlear-Implant Users.
Bernstein JGW; Jensen KK; Stakhovskaya OA; Noble JH; Hoa M; Kim HJ; Shih R; Kolberg E; Cleary M; Goupell MJ
J Neurosci; 2021 Dec; 41(49):10161-10178. PubMed ID: 34725189
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Perception and coding of interaural time differences with bilateral cochlear implants.
Laback B; Egger K; Majdak P
Hear Res; 2015 Apr; 322():138-50. PubMed ID: 25456088
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Objective measure of binaural processing: Acoustic change complex in response to interaural phase differences.
Fan Y; Gifford RH
Hear Res; 2024 Jul; 448():109020. PubMed ID: 38763034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Binaural cue sensitivity in cochlear implant recipients with acoustic hearing preservation.
Gifford RH; Stecker GC
Hear Res; 2020 May; 390():107929. PubMed ID: 32182551
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Sensitivity of bilateral cochlear implant users to fine-structure and envelope interaural time differences.
Noel VA; Eddington DK
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Apr; 133(4):2314-28. PubMed ID: 23556598
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Binaural pitch fusion: Pitch averaging and dominance in hearing-impaired listeners with broad fusion.
Oh Y; Reiss LAJ
J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Aug; 142(2):780. PubMed ID: 28863555
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Characterizing the relationship between modulation sensitivity and pitch resolution in cochlear implant users.
Camarena A; Goldsworthy RL
Hear Res; 2024 Jul; 448():109026. PubMed ID: 38776706
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Differences in the temporal course of interaural time difference sensitivity between acoustic and electric hearing in amplitude modulated stimuli.
Hu H; Ewert SD; McAlpine D; Dietz M
J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Mar; 141(3):1862. PubMed ID: 28372072
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
