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.
673 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27496539)
1. Does the degree of linguistic experience (native versus nonnative) modulate the degree to which listeners can benefit from a delay between the onset of the maskers and the onset of the target speech? Ben-David BM; Avivi-Reich M; Schneider BA Hear Res; 2016 Nov; 341():9-18. PubMed ID: 27496539 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Does it take older adults longer than younger adults to perceptually segregate a speech target from a background masker? Ben-David BM; Tse VY; Schneider BA Hear Res; 2012 Aug; 290(1-2):55-63. PubMed ID: 22609772 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Native and Non-native Speech Perception by Hearing-Impaired Listeners in Noise- and Speech Maskers. Kilman L; Zekveld A; Hällgren M; Rönnberg J Trends Hear; 2015 Apr; 19():. PubMed ID: 25910504 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Intelligibility of Noise-Adapted and Clear Speech in Energetic and Informational Maskers for Native and Nonnative Listeners. Meemann K; Smiljanić R J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2022 Apr; 65(4):1263-1281. PubMed ID: 35235410 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Effects of Second Language Proficiency and Linguistic Uncertainty on Recognition of Speech in Native and Nonnative Competing Speech. Francis AL; Tigchelaar LJ; Zhang R; Zekveld AA J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2018 Jul; 61(7):1815-1830. PubMed ID: 29971338 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Speech-on-speech masking with variable access to the linguistic content of the masker speech for native and nonnative english speakers. Calandruccio L; Bradlow AR; Dhar S J Am Acad Audiol; 2014 Apr; 25(4):355-66. PubMed ID: 25126683 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Release from perceptual masking for children and adults: benefit of a carrier phrase. Bonino AY; Leibold LJ; Buss E Ear Hear; 2013; 34(1):3-14. PubMed ID: 22836239 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Reception thresholds for sentences in quiet and noise for monolingual English and bilingual Mandarin-English listeners. Stuart A; Zhang J; Swink S J Am Acad Audiol; 2010 Apr; 21(4):239-48. PubMed ID: 20388450 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Effect of masker type on native and non-native consonant perception in noise. Garcia Lecumberri ML; Cooke M J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Apr; 119(4):2445-54. PubMed ID: 16642857 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Speech perception in quiet and noise using the hearing in noise test and the Japanese hearing in noise test by Japanese listeners. Nakamura K; Gordon-Salant S Ear Hear; 2011 Feb; 32(1):121-31. PubMed ID: 20628303 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Non-native listeners' recognition of high-variability speech using PRESTO. Tamati TN; Pisoni DB J Am Acad Audiol; 2014 Oct; 25(9):869-92. PubMed ID: 25405842 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Sentence Recognition in Steady-State Speech-Shaped Noise versus Four-Talker Babble. Vermiglio AJ; Herring CC; Heeke P; Post CE; Fang X J Am Acad Audiol; 2019 Jan; 30(1):54-65. PubMed ID: 30461388 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Talker-listener accent interactions in speech-in-noise recognition: effects of prosodic manipulation as a function of language experience. Pinet M; Iverson P J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Sep; 128(3):1357-65. PubMed ID: 20815470 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Effects of linguistic experience on the ability to benefit from temporal and spectral masker modulation. Calandruccio L; Buss E; Hall JW J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Mar; 135(3):1335-43. PubMed ID: 24606272 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Speech-on-speech masking with variable access to the linguistic content of the masker speech. Calandruccio L; Dhar S; Bradlow AR J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Aug; 128(2):860-9. PubMed ID: 20707455 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Do age and linguistic background alter the audiovisual advantage when listening to speech in the presence of energetic and informational masking? Avivi-Reich M; Puka K; Schneider BA Atten Percept Psychophys; 2018 Jan; 80(1):242-261. PubMed ID: 29039045 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A comparison of two word-recognition tasks in multitalker babble: Speech Recognition in Noise Test (SPRINT) and Words-in-Noise Test (WIN). Wilson RH; Cates WB J Am Acad Audiol; 2008; 19(7):548-56. PubMed ID: 19248731 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Perceptual restoration of locally time-reversed speech: Non-native listeners' performance in their L2 vs. L1. Ishida M Atten Percept Psychophys; 2021 Aug; 83(6):2675-2693. PubMed ID: 33861429 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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] [Next] [New Search]