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 *

137 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27768004)

  • 1. Office noise: Can headphones and masking sound attenuate distraction by background speech?
    Jahncke H; Björkeholm P; Marsh JE; Odelius J; Sörqvist P
    Work; 2016 Nov; 55(3):505-513. PubMed ID: 27768004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Unmasking the effects of masking on performance: The potential of multiple-voice masking in the office environment.
    Keus van de Poll M; Carlsson J; Marsh JE; Ljung R; Odelius J; Schlittmeier SJ; Sundin G; Sörqvist P
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Aug; 138(2):807-16. PubMed ID: 26328697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Auditory distraction by speech: Comparison of fluctuating and steady speech-like masking sounds.
    Renz T; Leistner P; Liebl A
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2018 Aug; 144(2):EL83. PubMed ID: 30180670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Mental arithmetic and non-speech office noise: an exploration of interference-by-content.
    Perham N; Hodgetts H; Banbury S
    Noise Health; 2013; 15(62):73-8. PubMed ID: 23412582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Irrelevant speech effect under stationary and adaptive masking conditions.
    Park M; Kohlrausch A; van Leest A
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Sep; 134(3):1970-81. PubMed ID: 23967930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Performance effects and subjective disturbance of speech in acoustically different office types--a laboratory experiment.
    Haka M; Haapakangas A; Keränen J; Hakala J; Keskinen E; Hongisto V
    Indoor Air; 2009 Dec; 19(6):454-67. PubMed ID: 19702627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effect of target-masker similarity on across-ear interference in a dichotic cocktail-party listening task.
    Brungart DS; Simpson BD
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Sep; 122(3):1724. PubMed ID: 17927432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Understanding speech when wearing communication headsets and hearing protectors with subband processing.
    Brammer AJ; Yu G; Bernstein ER; Cherniack MG; Peterson DR; Tufts JB
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Aug; 136(2):671-81. PubMed ID: 25096102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Detrimental effects of irrelevant speech on serial recall of visual items are reflected in reduced visual N1 and reduced theta activity.
    Weisz N; Schlittmeier SJ
    Cereb Cortex; 2006 Aug; 16(8):1097-105. PubMed ID: 16221927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Cross-language differences in informational masking of speech by speech: English versus Mandarin Chinese.
    Wu X; Yang Z; Huang Y; Chen J; Li L; Daneman M; Schneider BA
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2011 Dec; 54(6):1506-24. PubMed ID: 22180019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Tinnitus and short-term serial recall in stable versus intermittent masking conditions.
    Andersson G; Edsjö L; Kaldo V; Westin V
    Scand J Psychol; 2009 Oct; 50(5):517-22. PubMed ID: 19778399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Development and evaluation of the listening in spatialized noise test.
    Cameron S; Dillon H; Newall P
    Ear Hear; 2006 Feb; 27(1):30-42. PubMed ID: 16446563
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Improved segregation of simultaneous talkers differentially affects perceptual and cognitive capacity demands for recognizing speech in competing speech.
    Francis AL
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2010 Feb; 72(2):501-16. PubMed ID: 20139463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The role of speech fidelity in the irrelevant sound effect: Insights from noise-vocoded speech backgrounds.
    Dorsi J; Viswanathan N; Rosenblum LD; Dias JW
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2018 Oct; 71(10):2152-2161. PubMed ID: 30226434
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Multitalker speech perception with ideal time-frequency segregation: effects of voice characteristics and number of talkers.
    Brungart DS; Chang PS; Simpson BD; Wang D
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Jun; 125(6):4006-22. PubMed ID: 19507982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Auditory distraction by speech: Sound masking with speech-shaped stationary noise outperforms -5 dB per octave shaped noise.
    Renz T; Leistner P; Liebl A
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2018 Mar; 143(3):EL212. PubMed ID: 29604706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Speech intelligibility and passive, level-dependent earplugs.
    Norin JA; Emanuel DC; Letowski TR
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(5):642-9. PubMed ID: 21407078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Speech recognition in noise: estimating effects of compressive nonlinearities in the basilar-membrane response.
    Horwitz AR; Ahlstrom JB; Dubno JR
    Ear Hear; 2007 Sep; 28(5):682-93. PubMed ID: 17804982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. How the deployment of visual attention modulates auditory distraction.
    Marsh JE; Campbell TA; Vachon F; Taylor PJ; Hughes RW
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2020 Jan; 82(1):350-362. PubMed ID: 31290133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Attentional modulation of informational masking on early cortical representations of speech signals.
    Zhang C; Arnott SR; Rabaglia C; Avivi-Reich M; Qi J; Wu X; Li L; Schneider BA
    Hear Res; 2016 Jan; 331():119-30. PubMed ID: 26560239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.