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 *

184 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34717484)

  • 1. Accuracy and cue use in word segmentation for cochlear-implant listeners and normal-hearing listeners presented vocoded speech.
    Heffner CC; Jaekel BN; Newman RS; Goupell MJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2021 Oct; 150(4):2936. PubMed ID: 34717484
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Strategic perceptual weighting of acoustic cues for word stress in listeners with cochlear implants, acoustic hearing, or simulated bimodal hearing.
    Fleming JT; Winn MB
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2022 Sep; 152(3):1300. PubMed ID: 36182279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Acoustic cue integration in speech intonation recognition with cochlear implants.
    Peng SC; Chatterjee M; Lu N
    Trends Amplif; 2012 Jun; 16(2):67-82. PubMed ID: 22790392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effects of age on melody and timbre perception in simulations of electro-acoustic and cochlear-implant hearing.
    Arehart KH; Croghan NB; Muralimanohar RK
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(2):195-202. PubMed ID: 24441739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Discriminability and Perceptual Saliency of Temporal and Spectral Cues for Final Fricative Consonant Voicing in Simulated Cochlear-Implant and Bimodal Hearing.
    Kong YY; Winn MB; Poellmann K; Donaldson GS
    Trends Hear; 2016 Jun; 20():. PubMed ID: 27317666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Music Is More Enjoyable With Two Ears, Even If One of Them Receives a Degraded Signal Provided By a Cochlear Implant.
    Landsberger DM; Vermeire K; Stupak N; Lavender A; Neukam J; Van de Heyning P; Svirsky MA
    Ear Hear; 2020; 41(3):476-490. PubMed ID: 31469701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Lexical Access Changes Based on Listener Needs: Real-Time Word Recognition in Continuous Speech in Cochlear Implant Users.
    Smith FX; McMurray B
    Ear Hear; 2022 Sep-Oct 01; 43(5):1487-1501. PubMed ID: 35067570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effects of cooperating and conflicting cues on speech intonation recognition by cochlear implant users and normal hearing listeners.
    Peng SC; Lu N; Chatterjee M
    Audiol Neurootol; 2009; 14(5):327-37. PubMed ID: 19372651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Divided listening in the free field becomes asymmetric when acoustic cues are limited.
    Fumero MJ; Marrufo-Pérez MI; Eustaquio-Martín A; Lopez-Poveda EA
    Hear Res; 2022 Mar; 416():108444. PubMed ID: 35078133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Recognition of Accented Speech by Cochlear-Implant Listeners: Benefit of Audiovisual Cues.
    Waddington E; Jaekel BN; Tinnemore AR; Gordon-Salant S; Goupell MJ
    Ear Hear; 2020; 41(5):1236-1250. PubMed ID: 32069269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Weighting of Prosodic and Lexical-Semantic Cues for Emotion Identification in Spectrally Degraded Speech and With Cochlear Implants.
    Richter ME; Chatterjee M
    Ear Hear; 2021 Nov-Dec 01; 42(6):1727-1740. PubMed ID: 34294630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Meta-Analysis on the Identification of Linguistic and Emotional Prosody in Cochlear Implant Users and Vocoder Simulations.
    Everhardt MK; Sarampalis A; Coler M; Başkent D; Lowie W
    Ear Hear; 2020; 41(5):1092-1102. PubMed ID: 32251011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Assessing the Quality of Low-Frequency Acoustic Hearing: Implications for Combined Electroacoustic Stimulation With Cochlear Implants.
    Spitzer ER; Landsberger DM; Friedmann DR
    Ear Hear; 2021; 42(2):475-486. PubMed ID: 32976249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Using speech sounds to test functional spectral resolution in listeners with cochlear implants.
    Winn MB; Litovsky RY
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Mar; 137(3):1430-42. PubMed ID: 25786954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Spectral Contrast Effects Reveal Different Acoustic Cues for Vowel Recognition in Cochlear-Implant Users.
    Feng L; Oxenham AJ
    Ear Hear; 2020; 41(4):990-997. PubMed ID: 31815819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Sequential stream segregation in normally-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners.
    Tejani VD; Schvartz-Leyzac KC; Chatterjee M
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Jan; 141(1):50. PubMed ID: 28147600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Using prosody to infer discourse prominence in cochlear-implant users and normal-hearing listeners.
    Huang YT; Newman RS; Catalano A; Goupell MJ
    Cognition; 2017 Sep; 166():184-200. PubMed ID: 28578222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.