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 *

169 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33795615)

  • 41. Interaural speech asymmetry predicts bilateral speech intelligibility but not listening effort in adults with bilateral cochlear implants.
    Burg EA; Thakkar TD; Litovsky RY
    Front Neurosci; 2022; 16():1038856. PubMed ID: 36570844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Listening Effort and Speech Perception Performance Using Different Facemasks.
    Mendel LL; Pousson MA; Shukla B; Sander K; Larson B
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2022 Nov; 65(11):4354-4368. PubMed ID: 36215671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Listening Effort During Sentence Processing Is Increased for Non-native Listeners: A Pupillometry Study.
    Borghini G; Hazan V
    Front Neurosci; 2018; 12():152. PubMed ID: 29593489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Subjective Listening Effort and Electrodermal Activity in Listening Situations with Reverberation and Noise.
    Holube I; Haeder K; Imbery C; Weber R
    Trends Hear; 2016 Oct; 20():. PubMed ID: 27698257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. The pupil response reveals increased listening effort when it is difficult to focus attention.
    Koelewijn T; de Kluiver H; Shinn-Cunningham BG; Zekveld AA; Kramer SE
    Hear Res; 2015 May; 323():81-90. PubMed ID: 25732724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Benefit of binaural listening as revealed by speech intelligibility and listening effort.
    Rennies J; Kidd G
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2018 Oct; 144(4):2147. PubMed ID: 30404476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Systematic Comparison of Trial Exclusion Criteria for Pupillometry Data Analysis in Individuals With Single-Sided Deafness and Normal Hearing.
    Burg EA; Thakkar T; Fields T; Misurelli SM; Kuchinsky SE; Roche J; Lee DJ; Litovsky RY
    Trends Hear; 2021; 25():23312165211013256. PubMed ID: 34024219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Dual-Task Accuracy and Response Time Index Effects of Spoken Sentence Predictability and Cognitive Load on Listening Effort.
    Hunter CR
    Trends Hear; 2021; 25():23312165211018092. PubMed ID: 34674579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Effects of acoustic and semantic cues on listening effort during native and non-native speech perception.
    Borghini G; Hazan V
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2020 Jun; 147(6):3783. PubMed ID: 32611155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Attention Mobilization as a Modulator of Listening Effort: Evidence From Pupillometry.
    Johns MA; Calloway RC; Karunathilake IMD; Decruy LP; Anderson S; Simon JZ; Kuchinsky SE
    Trends Hear; 2024; 28():23312165241245240. PubMed ID: 38613337
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Previous Mental Load and Incentives Influence Anticipatory Arousal as Indexed by the Baseline Pupil Diameter in a Speech-in-Noise Task.
    Alfandari D; Richter M; Wendt D; Fiedler L; Naylor G
    Trends Hear; 2023; 27():23312165231196520. PubMed ID: 37847850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. The Effects of Task Difficulty Predictability and Noise Reduction on Recall Performance and Pupil Dilation Responses.
    Micula A; Rönnberg J; Fiedler L; Wendt D; Jørgensen MC; Larsen DK; Ng EHN
    Ear Hear; 2021 Nov-Dec 01; 42(6):1668-1679. PubMed ID: 33859121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. The Influence of Hearing Loss on the Pupil Response to Degraded Speech.
    Zekveld AA; Pielage H; Versfeld NJ; Kramer SE
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2023 Oct; 66(10):4083-4099. PubMed ID: 37699194
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Remote Microphone Systems Can Improve Listening-in-Noise Accuracy and Listening Effort for Youth With Autism.
    Feldman JI; Thompson E; Davis H; Keceli-Kaysili B; Dunham K; Woynaroski T; Tharpe AM; Picou EM
    Ear Hear; 2022; 43(2):436-447. PubMed ID: 35030553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. The Impact of Auditory Spectral Resolution on Listening Effort Revealed by Pupil Dilation.
    Winn MB; Edwards JR; Litovsky RY
    Ear Hear; 2015; 36(4):e153-65. PubMed ID: 25654299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Effect of Noise on Speech Intelligibility and Perceived Listening Effort in Head and Neck Cancer.
    Eadie TL; Durr H; Sauder C; Nagle K; Kapsner-Smith M; Spencer KA
    Am J Speech Lang Pathol; 2021 Jun; 30(3S):1329-1342. PubMed ID: 33630664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Verbal Response Times as a Potential Indicator of Cognitive Load During Conventional Speech Audiometry With Matrix Sentences.
    Meister H; Rählmann S; Lemke U; Besser J
    Trends Hear; 2018; 22():2331216518793255. PubMed ID: 30124111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Self-monitoring of listening abilities in normal-hearing children, normal-hearing adults, and children with cochlear implants.
    Rothpletz AM; Wightman FL; Kistler DJ
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2012 Mar; 23(3):206-21. PubMed ID: 22436118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Development of the Listening in Spatialized Noise-Sentences Test (LISN-S).
    Cameron S; Dillon H
    Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2):196-211. PubMed ID: 17496671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Comparisons of the Sensitivity and Reliability of Multiple Measures of Listening Effort.
    Giuliani NP; Brown CJ; Wu YH
    Ear Hear; 2021; 42(2):465-474. PubMed ID: 32925306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.