175 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24599314)
1. Objective assessment of spectral ripple discrimination in cochlear implant listeners using cortical evoked responses to an oddball paradigm.
Lopez Valdes A; Mc Laughlin M; Viani L; Walshe P; Smith J; Zeng FG; Reilly RB
PLoS One; 2014; 9(3):e90044. PubMed ID: 24599314
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Psychoacoustic abilities associated with music perception in cochlear implant users.
Won JH; Drennan WR; Kang RS; Rubinstein JT
Ear Hear; 2010 Dec; 31(6):796-805. PubMed ID: 20595901
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Relationship between behavioral and physiological spectral-ripple discrimination.
Won JH; Clinard CG; Kwon S; Dasika VK; Nie K; Drennan WR; Tremblay KL; Rubinstein JT
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2011 Jun; 12(3):375-93. PubMed ID: 21271274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Assessment of Spectral and Temporal Resolution in Cochlear Implant Users Using Psychoacoustic Discrimination and Speech Cue Categorization.
Winn MB; Won JH; Moon IJ
Ear Hear; 2016; 37(6):e377-e390. PubMed ID: 27438871
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Validation of a clinical assessment of spectral-ripple resolution for cochlear implant users.
Drennan WR; Anderson ES; Won JH; Rubinstein JT
Ear Hear; 2014; 35(3):e92-8. PubMed ID: 24552679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Mismatch negativity (MMN) objectively reflects timbre discrimination thresholds in normal-hearing listeners and cochlear implant users.
Rahne T; Plontke SK; Wagner L
Brain Res; 2014 Oct; 1586():143-51. PubMed ID: 25152464
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Relationships Among Peripheral and Central Electrophysiological Measures of Spatial and Spectral Selectivity and Speech Perception in Cochlear Implant Users.
Scheperle RA; Abbas PJ
Ear Hear; 2015; 36(4):441-53. PubMed ID: 25658746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evidence of across-channel processing for spectral-ripple discrimination in cochlear implant listeners.
Won JH; Jones GL; Drennan WR; Jameyson EM; Rubinstein JT
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Oct; 130(4):2088-97. PubMed ID: 21973363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Psychoacoustic and Demographic Factors for Speech Recognition of Older Adult Cochlear Implant Users.
Luo X; Kolberg C; Pulling KR; Azuma T
J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2020 Jun; 63(6):1712-1725. PubMed ID: 32501736
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Fitting prelingually deafened adult cochlear implant users based on electrode discrimination performance.
Debruyne JA; Francart T; Janssen AM; Douma K; Brokx JP
Int J Audiol; 2017 Mar; 56(3):174-185. PubMed ID: 27758152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Spectral and temporal measures in hybrid cochlear implant users: on the mechanism of electroacoustic hearing benefits.
Golub JS; Won JH; Drennan WR; Worman TD; Rubinstein JT
Otol Neurotol; 2012 Feb; 33(2):147-53. PubMed ID: 22215451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparing spatial tuning curves, spectral ripple resolution, and speech perception in cochlear implant users.
Anderson ES; Nelson DA; Kreft H; Nelson PB; Oxenham AJ
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jul; 130(1):364-75. PubMed ID: 21786905
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Relationship between channel interaction and spectral-ripple discrimination in cochlear implant users.
Jones GL; Won JH; Drennan WR; Rubinstein JT
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Jan; 133(1):425-33. PubMed ID: 23297914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Spectrotemporal Modulation Discrimination in Infants With Normal Hearing.
Noble AR; Resnick J; Broncheau M; Klotz S; Rubinstein JT; Werner LA; Horn DL
Ear Hear; 2023 Jan-Feb 01; 44(1):109-117. PubMed ID: 36218270
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Assessing the role of spectral and intensity cues in spectral ripple detection and discrimination in cochlear-implant users.
Anderson ES; Oxenham AJ; Nelson PB; Nelson DA
J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Dec; 132(6):3925-34. PubMed ID: 23231122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Temporal Fine Structure Processing, Pitch, and Speech Perception in Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients.
Dincer D'Alessandro H; Ballantyne D; Boyle PJ; De Seta E; DeVincentiis M; Mancini P
Ear Hear; 2018; 39(4):679-686. PubMed ID: 29194080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Music perception by cochlear implant and normal hearing listeners as measured by the Montreal Battery for Evaluation of Amusia.
Cooper WB; Tobey E; Loizou PC
Ear Hear; 2008 Aug; 29(4):618-26. PubMed ID: 18469714
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Psychoacoustic performance and music and speech perception in prelingually deafened children with cochlear implants.
Jung KH; Won JH; Drennan WR; Jameyson E; Miyasaki G; Norton SJ; Rubinstein JT
Audiol Neurootol; 2012; 17(3):189-97. PubMed ID: 22398954
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Psychophysical measures from electrical stimulation of the human cochlear nucleus.
Shannon RV; Otto SR
Hear Res; 1990 Aug; 47(1-2):159-68. PubMed ID: 2228792
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Nonlinguistic Outcome Measures in Adult Cochlear Implant Users Over the First Year of Implantation.
Drennan WR; Won JH; Timme AO; Rubinstein JT
Ear Hear; 2016; 37(3):354-64. PubMed ID: 26656317
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
