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 *

107 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27080685)

  • 21. Predicting consonant confusions from acoustic analysis.
    Dubno JR; Levitt H
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1981 Jan; 69(1):249-61. PubMed ID: 7217523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Predicting consonant recognition and confusions in normal-hearing listeners.
    Zaar J; Dau T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Feb; 141(2):1051. PubMed ID: 28253684
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Interactive factors in consonant confusion patterns.
    Bell TS; Dirks DD; Carterette EC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1989 Jan; 85(1):339-46. PubMed ID: 2921416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Acoustic differences, listener expectations, and the perceptual accommodation of talker variability.
    Magnuson JS; Nusbaum HC
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2007 Apr; 33(2):391-409. PubMed ID: 17469975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Consonant confusions in amplitude-expanded speech.
    Freyman RL; Nerbonne GP
    J Speech Hear Res; 1996 Dec; 39(6):1124-37. PubMed ID: 8959598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Effect of training on word-recognition performance in noise for young normal-hearing and older hearing-impaired listeners.
    Burk MH; Humes LE; Amos NE; Strauser LE
    Ear Hear; 2006 Jun; 27(3):263-78. PubMed ID: 16672795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Importance of temporal-envelope cues in consonant recognition.
    van der Horst R; Leeuw AR; Dreschler WA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1999 Mar; 105(3):1801-9. PubMed ID: 10089603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Sentence intelligibility during segmental interruption and masking by speech-modulated noise: Effects of age and hearing loss.
    Fogerty D; Ahlstrom JB; Bologna WJ; Dubno JR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Jun; 137(6):3487-501. PubMed ID: 26093436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Consonant identification in noise using Hilbert-transform temporal fine-structure speech and recovered-envelope speech for listeners with normal and impaired hearing.
    Léger AC; Reed CM; Desloge JG; Swaminathan J; Braida LD
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Jul; 138(1):389-403. PubMed ID: 26233038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Acoustic and electrical pattern analysis of consonant perceptual cues used by cochlear implant users.
    Teoh SW; Neuburger HS; Svirsky MA
    Audiol Neurootol; 2003; 8(5):269-85. PubMed ID: 12904682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Auditory versus phonetic accounts of observed confusions between consonant phonemes.
    Soli SD; Arabie P
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1979 Jul; 66(1):46-59. PubMed ID: 489832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Enhancing speech envelope by integrating hair-cell adaptation into cochlear implant processing.
    Azadpour M; Smith RL
    Hear Res; 2016 Dec; 342():48-57. PubMed ID: 27697486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Perception of vowels and prosody by cochlear implant recipients in noise.
    Van Zyl M; Hanekom JJ
    J Commun Disord; 2013; 46(5-6):449-64. PubMed ID: 24157128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The perceptual consequences of within-talker variability in fricative production.
    Newman RS; Clouse SA; Burnham JL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 Mar; 109(3):1181-96. PubMed ID: 11303932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Speech intelligibility in cochlear implant simulations: Effects of carrier type, interfering noise, and subject experience.
    Whitmal NA; Poissant SF; Freyman RL; Helfer KS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Oct; 122(4):2376-88. PubMed ID: 17902872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Masked Speech Perception Thresholds in Infants, Children, and Adults.
    Leibold LJ; Yarnell Bonino A; Buss E
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(3):345-53. PubMed ID: 26783855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Consonant recognition for spectrally degraded speech as a function of consonant-vowel intensity ratio.
    Balakrishnan U; Freyman RL; Chiang YC; Nerbonne GP; Shea KJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1996 Jun; 99(6):3758-69. PubMed ID: 8655807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. On cross-language consonant identification in second language noise.
    Marchegiani L; Fafoutis X
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Oct; 138(4):2206-9. PubMed ID: 26520302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Word recognition for temporally and spectrally distorted materials: the effects of age and hearing loss.
    Smith SL; Pichora-Fuller MK; Wilson RH; Macdonald EN
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(3):349-66. PubMed ID: 22343546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Microscopic prediction of speech recognition for listeners with normal hearing in noise using an auditory model.
    Jürgens T; Brand T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Nov; 126(5):2635-48. PubMed ID: 19894841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.