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 *

226 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30418995)

  • 1. What accounts for individual differences in susceptibility to the McGurk effect?
    Brown VA; Hedayati M; Zanger A; Mayn S; Ray L; Dillman-Hasso N; Strand JF
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(11):e0207160. PubMed ID: 30418995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Individual differences in susceptibility to the McGurk effect: links with lipreading and detecting audiovisual incongruity.
    Strand J; Cooperman A; Rowe J; Simenstad A
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2014 Dec; 57(6):2322-31. PubMed ID: 25296272
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A Causal Inference Model Explains Perception of the McGurk Effect and Other Incongruent Audiovisual Speech.
    Magnotti JF; Beauchamp MS
    PLoS Comput Biol; 2017 Feb; 13(2):e1005229. PubMed ID: 28207734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Perceptual uncertainty explains activation differences between audiovisual congruent speech and McGurk stimuli.
    Dong C; Noppeney U; Wang S
    Hum Brain Mapp; 2024 Mar; 45(4):e26653. PubMed ID: 38488460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Audiovisual speech perception: Moving beyond McGurk.
    Van Engen KJ; Dey A; Sommers MS; Peelle JE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2022 Dec; 152(6):3216. PubMed ID: 36586857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Rethinking the McGurk effect as a perceptual illusion.
    Getz LM; Toscano JC
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2021 Aug; 83(6):2583-2598. PubMed ID: 33884572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Variability and stability in the McGurk effect: contributions of participants, stimuli, time, and response type.
    Mallick DB; Magnotti JF; Beauchamp MS
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2015 Oct; 22(5):1299-307. PubMed ID: 25802068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. McGurk effect in non-English listeners: few visual effects for Japanese subjects hearing Japanese syllables of high auditory intelligibility.
    Sekiyama K; Tohkura Y
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1991 Oct; 90(4 Pt 1):1797-805. PubMed ID: 1960275
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Audiovisual integration in the McGurk effect is impervious to music training.
    Lee HH; Groves K; Ripollés P; Carrasco M
    Sci Rep; 2024 Feb; 14(1):3262. PubMed ID: 38332159
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Early and late beta-band power reflect audiovisual perception in the McGurk illusion.
    Roa Romero Y; Senkowski D; Keil J
    J Neurophysiol; 2015 Apr; 113(7):2342-50. PubMed ID: 25568160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Audiovisual sentence recognition not predicted by susceptibility to the McGurk effect.
    Van Engen KJ; Xie Z; Chandrasekaran B
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2017 Feb; 79(2):396-403. PubMed ID: 27921268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Audiovisual integration as conflict resolution: The conflict of the McGurk illusion.
    Morís Fernández L; Macaluso E; Soto-Faraco S
    Hum Brain Mapp; 2017 Nov; 38(11):5691-5705. PubMed ID: 28792094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Neural Mechanisms Underlying Cross-Modal Phonetic Encoding.
    Shahin AJ; Backer KC; Rosenblum LD; Kerlin JR
    J Neurosci; 2018 Feb; 38(7):1835-1849. PubMed ID: 29263241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Cultural and linguistic factors in audiovisual speech processing: the McGurk effect in Chinese subjects.
    Sekiyama K
    Percept Psychophys; 1997 Jan; 59(1):73-80. PubMed ID: 9038409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Motor Circuit and Superior Temporal Sulcus Activities Linked to Individual Differences in Multisensory Speech Perception.
    Li L; Li R; Huang X; Shen F; Wang H; Wang X; Deng C; Wang C; Yang J; Zhang L; Li J; Zou T; Chen H
    Brain Topogr; 2021 Nov; 34(6):779-792. PubMed ID: 34480635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A link between individual differences in multisensory speech perception and eye movements.
    Gurler D; Doyle N; Walker E; Magnotti J; Beauchamp M
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2015 May; 77(4):1333-41. PubMed ID: 25810157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Weak observer-level correlation and strong stimulus-level correlation between the McGurk effect and audiovisual speech-in-noise: A causal inference explanation.
    Magnotti JF; Dzeda KB; Wegner-Clemens K; Rennig J; Beauchamp MS
    Cortex; 2020 Dec; 133():371-383. PubMed ID: 33221701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Metacognition in the audiovisual McGurk illusion: perceptual and causal confidence.
    Meijer D; Noppeney U
    Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci; 2023 Sep; 378(1886):20220348. PubMed ID: 37545307
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Lexical influences in audiovisual speech perception.
    Brancazio L; Brancazio L
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2004 Jun; 30(3):445-63. PubMed ID: 15161378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. "Paying" attention to audiovisual speech: Do incongruent stimuli incur greater costs?
    Brown VA; Strand JF
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2019 Aug; 81(6):1743-1756. PubMed ID: 31197661
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.