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 *

238 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27698260)

  • 1. Rapid Release From Listening Effort Resulting From Semantic Context, and Effects of Spectral Degradation and Cochlear Implants.
    Winn MB
    Trends Hear; 2016 Oct; 20():. PubMed ID: 27698260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Slower Speaking Rate Reduces Listening Effort Among Listeners With Cochlear Implants.
    Winn MB; Teece KH
    Ear Hear; 2021; 42(3):584-595. PubMed ID: 33002968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Weighting of Prosodic and Lexical-Semantic Cues for Emotion Identification in Spectrally Degraded Speech and With Cochlear Implants.
    Richter ME; Chatterjee M
    Ear Hear; 2021 Nov-Dec 01; 42(6):1727-1740. PubMed ID: 34294630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Pupillometry Reveals That Context Benefit in Speech Perception Can Be Disrupted by Later-Occurring Sounds, Especially in Listeners With Cochlear Implants.
    Winn MB; Moore AN
    Trends Hear; 2018; 22():2331216518808962. PubMed ID: 30375282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The Effort of Repairing a Misperceived Word Can Impair Perception of Following Words, Especially for Listeners With Cochlear Implants.
    Winn MB
    Ear Hear; 2024 Nov-Dec 01; 45(6):1527-1541. PubMed ID: 38886880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Cochlear-Implant Simulated Signal Degradation Exacerbates Listening Effort in Older Listeners.
    Abramowitz JC; Goupell MJ; DeRoy Milvae K
    Ear Hear; 2024 Mar-Apr 01; 45(2):441-450. PubMed ID: 37953469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effects of Additional Low-Pass-Filtered Speech on Listening Effort for Noise-Band-Vocoded Speech in Quiet and in Noise.
    Pals C; Sarampalis A; van Dijk M; Başkent D
    Ear Hear; 2019; 40(1):3-17. PubMed ID: 29757801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Predictive Sentence Context Reduces Listening Effort in Older Adults With and Without Hearing Loss and With High and Low Working Memory Capacity.
    Hunter CR; Humes LE
    Ear Hear; 2022 Jul-Aug 01; 43(4):1164-1177. PubMed ID: 34983897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Semantic influences on the perception of degraded speech by individuals with cochlear implants.
    Patro C; Mendel LL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2020 Mar; 147(3):1778. PubMed ID: 32237796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Spectral-Temporal Trade-Off in Vocoded Sentence Recognition: Effects of Age, Hearing Thresholds, and Working Memory.
    Shader MJ; Yancey CM; Gordon-Salant S; Goupell MJ
    Ear Hear; 2020; 41(5):1226-1235. PubMed ID: 32032222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Gated Word Recognition by Postlingually Deafened Adults With Cochlear Implants: Influence of Semantic Context.
    Patro C; Mendel LL
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2018 Jan; 61(1):145-158. PubMed ID: 29242894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Semantic context improves speech intelligibility and reduces listening effort for listeners with hearing impairment.
    Holmes E; Folkeard P; Johnsrude IS; Scollie S
    Int J Audiol; 2018 Jul; 57(7):483-492. PubMed ID: 29415585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Top-Down Processes in Simulated Electric-Acoustic Hearing: The Effect of Linguistic Context on Bimodal Benefit for Temporally Interrupted Speech.
    Oh SH; Donaldson GS; Kong YY
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(5):582-92. PubMed ID: 27007220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Role of semantic context and talker variability in speech perception of cochlear-implant users and normal-hearing listeners.
    O'Neill ER; Parke MN; Kreft HA; Oxenham AJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2021 Feb; 149(2):1224. PubMed ID: 33639827
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Acoustic and semantic enhancements for children with cochlear implants.
    Smiljanic R; Sladen D
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2013 Aug; 56(4):1085-96. PubMed ID: 23785186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effortful Listening Despite Correct Responses: The Cost of Mental Repair in Sentence Recognition by Listeners With Cochlear Implants.
    Winn MB; Teece KH
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2022 Oct; 65(10):3966-3980. PubMed ID: 36112516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Transfer of auditory perceptual learning with spectrally reduced speech to speech and nonspeech tasks: implications for cochlear implants.
    Loebach JL; Pisoni DB; Svirsky MA
    Ear Hear; 2009 Dec; 30(6):662-74. PubMed ID: 19773659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Cognitive factors contribute to speech perception in cochlear-implant users and age-matched normal-hearing listeners under vocoded conditions.
    O'Neill ER; Kreft HA; Oxenham AJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2019 Jul; 146(1):195. PubMed ID: 31370651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Tracking Cognitive Spare Capacity During Speech Perception With EEG/ERP: Effects of Cognitive Load and Sentence Predictability.
    Hunter CR
    Ear Hear; 2020; 41(5):1144-1157. PubMed ID: 32282402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Measuring listening effort expended by adolescents and young adults with unilateral or bilateral cochlear implants or normal hearing.
    Hughes KC; Galvin KL
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2013 Jun; 14(3):121-9. PubMed ID: 23540588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.