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.
153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32105143)
21. Selective auditory attention in adults: effects of rhythmic structure of the competing language. Reel LA; Hicks CB J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2012 Feb; 55(1):89-104. PubMed ID: 22199199 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. 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]
23. Voice segregation by difference in fundamental frequency: effect of masker type. Deroche ML; Culling JF J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Nov; 134(5):EL465-70. PubMed ID: 24181992 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Age-related changes in listening effort for various types of masker noises. Desjardins JL; Doherty KA Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):261-72. PubMed ID: 23095723 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. 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]
27. Toward a more comprehensive understanding of the impact of masker type and signal-to-noise ratio on the pupillary response while performing a speech-in-noise test. Wendt D; Koelewijn T; Książek P; Kramer SE; Lunner T Hear Res; 2018 Nov; 369():67-78. PubMed ID: 29858121 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Linguistic contributions to speech-on-speech masking for native and non-native listeners: language familiarity and semantic content. Brouwer S; Van Engen KJ; Calandruccio L; Bradlow AR J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Feb; 131(2):1449-64. PubMed ID: 22352516 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Enhancing speech intelligibility: interactions among context, modality, speech style, and masker. Van Engen KJ; Phelps JE; Smiljanic R; Chandrasekaran B J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2014 Oct; 57(5):1908-18. PubMed ID: 24687206 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. No interaction between fundamental-frequency differences and spectral region when perceiving speech in a speech background. Madsen SMK; Dau T; Oxenham AJ PLoS One; 2021; 16(4):e0249654. PubMed ID: 33826663 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Highly accurate and robust identity perception from personally familiar voices. Kanber E; Lavan N; McGettigan C J Exp Psychol Gen; 2022 Apr; 151(4):897-911. PubMed ID: 34672658 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Developmental Effects in Children's Ability to Benefit From F0 Differences Between Target and Masker Speech. Flaherty MM; Buss E; Leibold LJ Ear Hear; 2019; 40(4):927-937. PubMed ID: 30334835 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Intelligibility of emotional speech in younger and older adults. Dupuis K; Pichora-Fuller MK Ear Hear; 2014; 35(6):695-707. PubMed ID: 25127327 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. The effects of working memory capacity and semantic cues on the intelligibility of speech in noise. Zekveld AA; Rudner M; Johnsrude IS; Rönnberg J J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Sep; 134(3):2225-34. PubMed ID: 23967952 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Development of Open-Set Word Recognition in Children: Speech-Shaped Noise and Two-Talker Speech Maskers. Corbin NE; Bonino AY; Buss E; Leibold LJ Ear Hear; 2016; 37(1):55-63. PubMed ID: 26226605 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]