442 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25853616)
1. An examination of speech reception thresholds measured in a simulated reverberant cafeteria environment.
Best V; Keidser G; Buchholz JM; Freeston K
Int J Audiol; 2015; 54(10):682-90. PubMed ID: 25853616
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The effect of nearby maskers on speech intelligibility in reverberant, multi-talker environments.
Westermann A; Buchholz JM
J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Mar; 141(3):2214. PubMed ID: 28372143
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Speech reception with different bilateral directional processing schemes: Influence of binaural hearing, audiometric asymmetry, and acoustic scenario.
Neher T; Wagener KC; Latzel M
Hear Res; 2017 Sep; 353():36-48. PubMed ID: 28783570
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A physiologically-inspired model reproducing the speech intelligibility benefit in cochlear implant listeners with residual acoustic hearing.
Zamaninezhad L; Hohmann V; Büchner A; Schädler MR; Jürgens T
Hear Res; 2017 Feb; 344():50-61. PubMed ID: 27838372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The Just-Meaningful Difference in Speech-to-Noise Ratio.
McShefferty D; Whitmer WM; Akeroyd MA
Trends Hear; 2016 Feb; 20():. PubMed ID: 26834121
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. On a reference-free speech quality estimator for hearing aids.
Suelzle D; Parsa V; Falk TH
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 May; 133(5):EL412-8. PubMed ID: 23656102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Benefits of Acoustic Beamforming for Solving the Cocktail Party Problem.
Kidd G; Mason CR; Best V; Swaminathan J
Trends Hear; 2015 Jun; 19():. PubMed ID: 26126896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The influence of audiovisual ceiling performance on the relationship between reverberation and directional benefit: perception and prediction.
Wu YH; Bentler RA
Ear Hear; 2012; 33(5):604-14. PubMed ID: 22677815
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Impact of room acoustic parameters on speech and music perception among participants with cochlear implants.
Eurich B; Klenzner T; Oehler M
Hear Res; 2019 Jun; 377():122-132. PubMed ID: 30933704
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Do you hear the noise? The German matrix sentence test with a fixed noise level in subjects with normal hearing and hearing impairment.
Wardenga N; Batsoulis C; Wagener KC; Brand T; Lenarz T; Maier H
Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():71-9. PubMed ID: 26555195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Large-scale training to increase speech intelligibility for hearing-impaired listeners in novel noises.
Chen J; Wang Y; Yoho SE; Wang D; Healy EW
J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 May; 139(5):2604. PubMed ID: 27250154
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Wireless and acoustic hearing with bone-anchored hearing devices.
Bosman AJ; Mylanus EA; Hol MK; Snik AF
Int J Audiol; 2015 Jul; 55(7):419-24. PubMed ID: 27176657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effect of companding on speech recognition in quiet and noise for listeners with ANSD.
Narne VK; Barman A; Deepthi M
Int J Audiol; 2014 Feb; 53(2):94-100. PubMed ID: 24237041
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. An algorithm that administers adaptive speech-in-noise testing to a specified reliability at selectable points on the psychometric function.
Keidser G; Dillon H; Mejia J; Nguyen CV
Int J Audiol; 2013 Nov; 52(11):795-800. PubMed ID: 23957444
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Characterizing the Speech Reception Threshold in hearing-impaired listeners in relation to masker type and masker level.
Rhebergen KS; Pool RE; Dreschler WA
J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Mar; 135(3):1491-505. PubMed ID: 24606285
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effects of attention on the speech reception threshold and pupil response of people with impaired and normal hearing.
Koelewijn T; Versfeld NJ; Kramer SE
Hear Res; 2017 Oct; 354():56-63. PubMed ID: 28869841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The Danish hearing in noise test.
Nielsen JB; Dau T
Int J Audiol; 2011 Mar; 50(3):202-8. PubMed ID: 21319937
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Binaural speech intelligibility in rooms with variations in spatial location of sources and modulation depth of noise interferers.
Collin B; Lavandier M
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Aug; 134(2):1146-59. PubMed ID: 23927114
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Two-microphone spatial filtering improves speech reception for cochlear-implant users in reverberant conditions with multiple noise sources.
Goldsworthy RL
Trends Hear; 2014 Oct; 18():. PubMed ID: 25330772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Spatial release from masking in normal-hearing children and children who use hearing aids.
Ching TY; van Wanrooy E; Dillon H; Carter L
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jan; 129(1):368-75. PubMed ID: 21303017
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
