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 *

171 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32359241)

  • 1. Toddlers' fast-mapping from noise-vocoded speech.
    Newman RS; Morini G; Shroads E; Chatterjee M
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2020 Apr; 147(4):2432. PubMed ID: 32359241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Toddlers' recognition of noise-vocoded speech.
    Newman R; Chatterjee M
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Jan; 133(1):483-94. PubMed ID: 23297920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Some Neurocognitive Correlates of Noise-Vocoded Speech Perception in Children With Normal Hearing: A Replication and Extension of ).
    Roman AS; Pisoni DB; Kronenberger WG; Faulkner KF
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(3):344-356. PubMed ID: 28045787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Emotion and Word Recognition for Unprocessed and Vocoded Speech Stimuli.
    Morgan SD; Garrard S; Hoskins T
    Ear Hear; 2022; 43(2):398-407. PubMed ID: 34310412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Spectral and temporal resolutions of information-bearing acoustic changes for understanding vocoded sentences.
    Stilp CE; Goupell MJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Feb; 137(2):844-55. PubMed ID: 25698018
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Toddlers' comprehension of degraded signals: Noise-vocoded versus sine-wave analogs.
    Newman RS; Chatterjee M; Morini G; Remez RE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Sep; 138(3):EL311-7. PubMed ID: 26428832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Human Frequency Following Responses to Vocoded Speech: Amplitude Modulation Versus Amplitude Plus Frequency Modulation.
    Suresh CH; Krishnan A; Luo X
    Ear Hear; 2020; 41(2):300-311. PubMed ID: 31246660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Human Frequency Following Responses to Vocoded Speech.
    Ananthakrishnan S; Luo X; Krishnan A
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(5):e256-e267. PubMed ID: 28362674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Recognition of vocoded words and sentences in quiet and multi-talker babble with children and adults.
    Goupell MJ; Draves GT; Litovsky RY
    PLoS One; 2020; 15(12):e0244632. PubMed ID: 33373427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Noise susceptibility of cochlear implant users: the role of spectral resolution and smearing.
    Fu QJ; Nogaki G
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2005 Mar; 6(1):19-27. PubMed ID: 15735937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Individual Variability in Recalibrating to Spectrally Shifted Speech: Implications for Cochlear Implants.
    Smith ML; Winn MB
    Ear Hear; 2021; 42(5):1412-1427. PubMed ID: 33795617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Listeners Experience Linguistic Masking Release in Noise-Vocoded Speech-in-Speech Recognition.
    Viswanathan N; Kokkinakis K; Williams BT
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2018 Feb; 61(2):428-435. PubMed ID: 29396580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparing live to recorded speech in training the perception of spectrally shifted noise-vocoded speech.
    Faulkner A; Rosen S; Green T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Oct; 132(4):EL336-42. PubMed ID: 23039574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Spectral density affects the intelligibility of tone-vocoded speech: Implications for cochlear implant simulations.
    Rosen S; Zhang Y; Speers K
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Sep; 138(3):EL318-23. PubMed ID: 26428833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants.
    Friesen LM; Shannon RV; Baskent D; Wang X
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 Aug; 110(2):1150-63. PubMed ID: 11519582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Benefits to Speech Perception in Noise From the Binaural Integration of Electric and Acoustic Signals in Simulated Unilateral Deafness.
    Ma N; Morris S; Kitterick PT
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(3):248-59. PubMed ID: 27116049
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Factors affecting speech understanding in gated interference: cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners.
    Nelson PB; Jin SH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2004 May; 115(5 Pt 1):2286-94. PubMed ID: 15139640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.