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 *

126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34628259)

  • 1. Idiosyncratic use of bottom-up and top-down information leads to differences in speech perception flexibility: Converging evidence from ERPs and eye-tracking.
    Kapnoula EC; McMurray B
    Brain Lang; 2021 Dec; 223():105031. PubMed ID: 34628259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Gradient activation of speech categories facilitates listeners' recovery from lexical garden paths, but not perception of speech-in-noise.
    Kapnoula EC; Edwards J; McMurray B
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2021 Apr; 47(4):578-595. PubMed ID: 33983791
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The Effect of Residual Acoustic Hearing and Adaptation to Uncertainty on Speech Perception in Cochlear Implant Users: Evidence From Eye-Tracking.
    McMurray B; Farris-Trimble A; Seedorff M; Rigler H
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(1):e37-51. PubMed ID: 26317298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Individual differences in categorical perception of speech: Cue weighting and executive function.
    Kong EJ; Edwards J
    J Phon; 2016 Nov; 59():40-57. PubMed ID: 28503007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Auditory cortical activity to different voice onset times in cochlear implant users.
    Han JH; Zhang F; Kadis DS; Houston LM; Samy RN; Smith ML; Dimitrijevic A
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2016 Feb; 127(2):1603-1617. PubMed ID: 26616545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Moving away from deficiency models: Gradiency in bilingual speech categorization.
    Kutlu E; Chiu S; McMurray B
    Front Psychol; 2022; 13():1033825. PubMed ID: 36507048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Individual Differences in Categorization Gradience As Predicted by Online Processing of Phonetic Cues During Spoken Word Recognition: Evidence From Eye Movements.
    Ou J; Yu ACL; Xiang M
    Cogn Sci; 2021 Mar; 45(3):e12948. PubMed ID: 33682211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Assessment of Spectral and Temporal Resolution in Cochlear Implant Users Using Psychoacoustic Discrimination and Speech Cue Categorization.
    Winn MB; Won JH; Moon IJ
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(6):e377-e390. PubMed ID: 27438871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Individual Differences in Categorical Judgment of L2 Stops: A Link to Proficiency and Acoustic Cue-Weighting.
    Kong EJ; Kang S
    Lang Speech; 2023 Jun; 66(2):354-380. PubMed ID: 35822267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Tracking the time course of phonetic cue integration during spoken word recognition.
    McMurray B; Clayards MA; Tanenhaus MK; Aslin RN
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2008 Dec; 15(6):1064-71. PubMed ID: 19001568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Language Specificity in Phonetic Cue Weighting: Monolingual and Bilingual Perception of the Stop Voicing Contrast in English and Spanish.
    Schertz J; Carbonell K; Lotto AJ
    Phonetica; 2020; 77(3):186-208. PubMed ID: 31018217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Transformation of a temporal speech cue to a spatial neural code in human auditory cortex.
    Fox NP; Leonard M; Sjerps MJ; Chang EF
    Elife; 2020 Aug; 9():. PubMed ID: 32840483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Impaired Categorical Perception of Speech Sounds Under the Backward Masking Condition in Adults Who Stutter.
    Shao J; Bakhtiar M; Zhang C
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2022 Jul; 65(7):2554-2570. PubMed ID: 35858255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Listener sensitivity to individual talker differences in voice-onset-time.
    Allen JS; Miller JL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2004 Jun; 115(6):3171-83. PubMed ID: 15237841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Gradient and categorical patterns of spoken-word recognition and processing of phonetic details.
    Desmeules-Trudel F; Zamuner TS
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2019 Jul; 81(5):1654-1672. PubMed ID: 30815793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Individual differences in perceptual adaptability of foreign sound categories.
    Schertz J; Cho T; Lotto A; Warner N
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2016 Jan; 78(1):355-67. PubMed ID: 26404530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Distributional learning for speech reflects cumulative exposure to a talker's phonetic distributions.
    Theodore RM; Monto NR
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2019 Jun; 26(3):985-992. PubMed ID: 30604404
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Cue-integration and context effects in speech: evidence against speaking-rate normalization.
    Toscano JC; McMurray B
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2012 Aug; 74(6):1284-301. PubMed ID: 22532385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Evaluating the sources and functions of gradiency in phoneme categorization: An individual differences approach.
    Kapnoula EC; Winn MB; Kong EJ; Edwards J; McMurray B
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2017 Sep; 43(9):1594-1611. PubMed ID: 28406683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Functional benefits of continuous vs. categorical listening strategies on the neural encoding and perception of noise-degraded speech.
    Rizzi R; Bidelman GM
    bioRxiv; 2024 May; ():. PubMed ID: 38798410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.