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.
146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34118494)
1. Listening effort and fatigue in native and non-native primary school children. Brännström KJ; Rudner M; Carlie J; Sahlén B; Gulz A; Andersson K; Johansson R J Exp Child Psychol; 2021 Oct; 210():105203. PubMed ID: 34118494 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Measuring listening-related effort and fatigue in school-aged children using pupillometry. McGarrigle R; Dawes P; Stewart AJ; Kuchinsky SE; Munro KJ J Exp Child Psychol; 2017 Sep; 161():95-112. PubMed ID: 28505505 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. Pupil response as an indication of effortful listening: the influence of sentence intelligibility. Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Festen JM Ear Hear; 2010 Aug; 31(4):480-90. PubMed ID: 20588118 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Speech recognition in noise task among children and young-adults: a pupillometry study. Trau-Margalit A; Fostick L; Harel-Arbeli T; Nissanholtz-Gannot R; Taitelbaum-Swead R Front Psychol; 2023; 14():1188485. PubMed ID: 37425148 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Effect of Speech-to-Noise Ratio and Luminance on a Range of Current and Potential Pupil Response Measures to Assess Listening Effort. Książek P; Zekveld AA; Wendt D; Fiedler L; Lunner T; Kramer SE Trends Hear; 2021; 25():23312165211009351. PubMed ID: 33926329 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Be Quiet! Effects of Competing Speakers and Individual Characteristics on Listening Comprehension for Primary School Students. Visentin C; Pellegatti M; Garraffa M; Di Domenico A; Prodi N Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2023 Mar; 20(6):. PubMed ID: 36981730 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A Slight Increase in Reverberation Time in the Classroom Affects Performance and Behavioral Listening Effort. Prodi N; Visentin C Ear Hear; 2022; 43(2):460-476. PubMed ID: 34369418 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Dimensions of self-reported listening effort and fatigue on a digits-in-noise task, and association with baseline pupil size and performance accuracy. Alhanbali S; Munro KJ; Dawes P; Carolan PJ; Millman RE Int J Audiol; 2021 Oct; 60(10):762-772. PubMed ID: 33320028 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effect of speech-shaped noise on the recognition of malayalam and english consonants by malayalam listeners. Kalaiah MK; Bhat JS; Shastri U Noise Health; 2019; 21(99):55-61. PubMed ID: 32174639 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The effect of reward on listening effort as reflected by the pupil dilation response. Koelewijn T; Zekveld AA; Lunner T; Kramer SE Hear Res; 2018 Sep; 367():106-112. PubMed ID: 30096490 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. An exploratory Study of EEG Alpha Oscillation and Pupil Dilation in Hearing-Aid Users During Effortful listening to Continuous Speech. Seifi Ala T; Graversen C; Wendt D; Alickovic E; Whitmer WM; Lunner T PLoS One; 2020; 15(7):e0235782. PubMed ID: 32649733 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Time-specific Components of Pupil Responses Reveal Alternations in Effort Allocation Caused by Memory Task Demands During Speech Identification in Noise. Książek P; Zekveld AA; Fiedler L; Kramer SE; Wendt D Trends Hear; 2023; 27():23312165231153280. PubMed ID: 36938784 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Hearing Aid Noise Reduction Lowers the Sustained Listening Effort During Continuous Speech in Noise-A Combined Pupillometry and EEG Study. Fiedler L; Seifi Ala T; Graversen C; Alickovic E; Lunner T; Wendt D Ear Hear; 2021 Nov-Dec 01; 42(6):1590-1601. PubMed ID: 33950865 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Listening Effort in Cochlear Implant Users: The Effect of Speech Intelligibility, Noise Reduction Processing, and Working Memory Capacity on the Pupil Dilation Response. Dingemanse G; Goedegebure A J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2022 Jan; 65(1):392-404. PubMed ID: 34898265 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Behavioral Measures of Listening Effort in School-Age Children: Examining the Effects of Signal-to-Noise Ratio, Hearing Loss, and Amplification. McGarrigle R; Gustafson SJ; Hornsby BWY; Bess FH Ear Hear; 2019; 40(2):381-392. PubMed ID: 29905670 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Impact of SNR, masker type and noise reduction processing on sentence recognition performance and listening effort as indicated by the pupil dilation response. Ohlenforst B; Wendt D; Kramer SE; Naylor G; Zekveld AA; Lunner T Hear Res; 2018 Aug; 365():90-99. PubMed ID: 29779607 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]