244 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32486777)
1. The relationship between talker acoustics, intelligibility, and effort in degraded listening conditions.
Paulus M; Hazan V; Adank P
J Acoust Soc Am; 2020 May; 147(5):3348. PubMed ID: 32486777
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Listening Effort by Native and Nonnative Listeners Due to Noise, Reverberation, and Talker Foreign Accent During English Speech Perception.
Peng ZE; Wang LM
J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2019 Apr; 62(4):1068-1081. PubMed ID: 30986135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Talker- and language-specific effects on speech intelligibility in noise assessed with bilingual talkers: Which language is more robust against noise and reverberation?
Hochmuth S; Jürgens T; Brand T; Kollmeier B
Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():23-34. PubMed ID: 26486466
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Short Implicit Voice Training Affects Listening Effort During a Voice Cue Sensitivity Task With Vocoder-Degraded Speech.
Biçer A; Koelewijn T; Başkent D
Ear Hear; 2023 Jul-Aug 01; 44(4):900-916. PubMed ID: 36695603
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Perceptual adaptation and intelligibility of multiple talkers for two types of degraded speech.
Bent T; Buchwald A; Pisoni DB
J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Nov; 126(5):2660-9. PubMed ID: 19894843
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Speech production modifications produced by competing talkers, babble, and stationary noise.
Lu Y; Cooke M
J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Nov; 124(5):3261-75. PubMed ID: 19045809
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Accent Intelligibility Differences in Noise Across Native and Nonnative Accents: Effects of Talker-Listener Pairing at Acoustic-Phonetic and Lexical Levels.
Stringer L; Iverson P
J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2019 Jul; 62(7):2213-2226. PubMed ID: 31251681
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Impact of talker variability on word recognition in non-native listeners.
van Dommelen WA; Hazan V
J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1690-9. PubMed ID: 22978897
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Pupil dilation uncovers extra listening effort in the presence of a single-talker masker.
Koelewijn T; Zekveld AA; Festen JM; Kramer SE
Ear Hear; 2012; 33(2):291-300. PubMed ID: 21921797
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Information-bearing acoustic change outperforms duration in predicting intelligibility of full-spectrum and noise-vocoded sentences.
Stilp CE
J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Mar; 135(3):1518-29. PubMed ID: 24606287
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Second-language experience and speech-in-noise recognition: effects of talker-listener accent similarity.
Pinet M; Iverson P; Huckvale M
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Sep; 130(3):1653-62. PubMed ID: 21895102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Acoustic-phonetic characteristics of speech produced with communicative intent to counter adverse listening conditions.
Hazan V; Baker R
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Oct; 130(4):2139-52. PubMed ID: 21973368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Sentence intelligibility during segmental interruption and masking by speech-modulated noise: Effects of age and hearing loss.
Fogerty D; Ahlstrom JB; Bologna WJ; Dubno JR
J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Jun; 137(6):3487-501. PubMed ID: 26093436
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The Effect of Talker and Listener Depressive Symptoms on Speech Intelligibility.
Yi H; Smiljanic R; Chandrasekaran B
J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2019 Dec; 62(12):4269-4281. PubMed ID: 31738862
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Impact of stimulus-related factors and hearing impairment on listening effort as indicated by pupil dilation.
Ohlenforst B; Zekveld AA; Lunner T; Wendt D; Naylor G; Wang Y; Versfeld NJ; Kramer SE
Hear Res; 2017 Aug; 351():68-79. PubMed ID: 28622894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Recognition memory in noise for speech of varying intelligibility.
Gilbert RC; Chandrasekaran B; Smiljanic R
J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jan; 135(1):389-99. PubMed ID: 24437779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Factors that can affect divided speech intelligibility.
Fumero MJ; Marrufo-Pérez MI; Eustaquio-Martín A; Lopez-Poveda EA
Hear Res; 2024 Jan; 441():108917. PubMed ID: 38061268
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effects of noise and talker intelligibility on judgments of accentedness.
Gittleman S; Van Engen KJ
J Acoust Soc Am; 2018 May; 143(5):3138. PubMed ID: 29857746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Energetic and Informational Components of Speech-on-Speech Masking in Binaural Speech Intelligibility and Perceived Listening Effort.
Rennies J; Best V; Roverud E; Kidd G
Trends Hear; 2019; 23():2331216519854597. PubMed ID: 31172880
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
