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 *

175 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24456181)

  • 1. Effects of noise and audiovisual cues on speech processing in adults with and without ADHD.
    Michalek AM; Watson SM; Ash I; Ringleb S; Raymer A
    Int J Audiol; 2014 Mar; 53(3):145-52. PubMed ID: 24456181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Older adults expend more listening effort than young adults recognizing audiovisual speech in noise.
    Gosselin PA; Gagné JP
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Nov; 50(11):786-92. PubMed ID: 21916790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Development of a test battery for evaluating speech perception in complex listening environments.
    Brungart DS; Sheffield BM; Kubli LR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Aug; 136(2):777-90. PubMed ID: 25096112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Reduced efficiency of audiovisual integration for nonnative speech.
    Yi HG; Phelps JE; Smiljanic R; Chandrasekaran B
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Nov; 134(5):EL387-93. PubMed ID: 24181980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. The independence of working memory capacity and audiovisual cues when listening in noise.
    Michalek AMP; Ash I; Schwartz K
    Scand J Psychol; 2018 Dec; 59(6):578-585. PubMed ID: 30180277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Audiovisual training is better than auditory-only training for auditory-only speech-in-noise identification.
    Lidestam B; Moradi S; Pettersson R; Ricklefs T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Aug; 136(2):EL142-7. PubMed ID: 25096138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Musician enhancement for speech-in-noise.
    Parbery-Clark A; Skoe E; Lam C; Kraus N
    Ear Hear; 2009 Dec; 30(6):653-61. PubMed ID: 19734788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Visual information can hinder working memory processing of speech.
    Mishra S; Lunner T; Stenfelt S; Rönnberg J; Rudner M
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2013 Aug; 56(4):1120-32. PubMed ID: 23785180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Binding and unbinding the auditory and visual streams in the McGurk effect.
    Nahorna O; Berthommier F; Schwartz JL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Aug; 132(2):1061-77. PubMed ID: 22894226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Acceptable range of speech level in noisy sound fields for young adults and elderly persons.
    Sato H; Morimoto M; Ota R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Sep; 130(3):1411-9. PubMed ID: 21895082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Visually guided auditory attention in a dynamic "cocktail-party" speech perception task: ERP evidence for age-related differences.
    Getzmann S; Wascher E
    Hear Res; 2017 Feb; 344():98-108. PubMed ID: 27825858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Increasing motivation changes subjective reports of listening effort and choice of coping strategy.
    Picou EM; Ricketts TA
    Int J Audiol; 2014 Jun; 53(6):418-26. PubMed ID: 24597604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. How hearing aids, background noise, and visual cues influence objective listening effort.
    Picou EM; Ricketts TA; Hornsby BW
    Ear Hear; 2013 Sep; 34(5):e52-64. PubMed ID: 23416751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Visual cues and listening effort: individual variability.
    Picou EM; Ricketts TA; Hornsby BW
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2011 Oct; 54(5):1416-30. PubMed ID: 21498576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.