156 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34866509)
1. Effects of Increasing the Overall Level or Fitting Hearing Aids on Emotional Responses to Sounds.
Picou EM; Rakita L; Buono GH; Moore TM
Trends Hear; 2021; 25():23312165211049938. PubMed ID: 34866509
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Emotional Responses to Non-Speech Sounds for Hearing-aid and Bimodal Cochlear-Implant Listeners.
Tawdrous MM; D'Onofrio KL; Gifford R; Picou EM
Trends Hear; 2022; 26():23312165221083091. PubMed ID: 35435773
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. How Hearing Loss and Age Affect Emotional Responses to Nonspeech Sounds.
Picou EM
J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2016 Oct; 59(5):1233-1246. PubMed ID: 27768178
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Sound Quality Effects of an Adaptive Nonlinear Frequency Compression Processor with Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Listeners.
Glista D; Hawkins M; Vaisberg JM; Pourmand N; Parsa V; Scollie S
J Am Acad Audiol; 2019; 30(7):552-563. PubMed ID: 30395533
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A Comparison between a remote testing and a laboratory test setting for evaluating emotional responses to non-speech sounds.
Picou EM; Singh G; Russo FA
Int J Audiol; 2022 Oct; 61(10):799-808. PubMed ID: 34883031
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Effects of frequency compression and frequency transposition on fricative and affricate perception in listeners with normal hearing and mild to moderate hearing loss.
Alexander JM; Kopun JG; Stelmachowicz PG
Ear Hear; 2014; 35(5):519-32. PubMed ID: 24699702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A Patient-Centered, Provider-Facilitated Approach to the Refinement of Nonlinear Frequency Compression Parameters Based on Subjective Preference Ratings of Amplified Sound Quality.
Johnson EE; Light KC
J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Sep; 26(8):689-702. PubMed ID: 26333877
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Loss of high- or low-frequency audibility can partially explain effects of hearing loss on emotional responses to non-speech sounds.
Buono GH; Crukley J; Hornsby BWY; Picou EM
Hear Res; 2021 Mar; 401():108153. PubMed ID: 33360158
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Evaluation of the effects of nonlinear frequency compression on speech recognition and sound quality for adults with mild to moderate hearing loss.
Picou EM; Marcrum SC; Ricketts TA
Int J Audiol; 2015 Mar; 54(3):162-9. PubMed ID: 25731581
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The influence of audibility on speech recognition with nonlinear frequency compression for children and adults with hearing loss.
McCreery RW; Alexander J; Brennan MA; Hoover B; Kopun J; Stelmachowicz PG
Ear Hear; 2014; 35(4):440-7. PubMed ID: 24535558
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Nonlinear frequency compression: effects on sound quality ratings of speech and music.
Parsa V; Scollie S; Glista D; Seelisch A
Trends Amplif; 2013 Mar; 17(1):54-68. PubMed ID: 23539261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Listening Effort and Speech Recognition with Frequency Compression Amplification for Children and Adults with Hearing Loss.
Brennan MA; Lewis D; McCreery R; Kopun J; Alexander JM
J Am Acad Audiol; 2017 Oct; 28(9):823-837. PubMed ID: 28972471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Emotional Responses to Pleasant Sounds Are Related to Social Disconnectedness and Loneliness Independent of Hearing Loss.
Picou EM; Buono GH
Trends Hear; 2018; 22():2331216518813243. PubMed ID: 30482108
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Effects of nonlinear frequency compression on Mandarin speech and sound-quality perception in hearing-aid users.
Chen X; You Y; Yang J; Qian J; Lu Q; Kuehnel V; Rehmann J; Liu B; Xu L
Int J Audiol; 2020 Jul; 59(7):524-533. PubMed ID: 32441563
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Speech Perception and Sound-Quality Rating with an Adaptive Nonlinear Frequency Compression Algorithm in Mandarin-Speaking Hearing Aid Users.
Xu L; Voss SC; Yang J; Wang X; Lu Q; Rehmann J; Kuehnel V; Qian J
J Am Acad Audiol; 2020 Sep; 31(8):590-598. PubMed ID: 32340058
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Paired comparisons of nonlinear frequency compression, extended bandwidth, and restricted bandwidth hearing aid processing for children and adults with hearing loss.
Brennan MA; McCreery R; Kopun J; Hoover B; Alexander J; Lewis D; Stelmachowicz PG
J Am Acad Audiol; 2014; 25(10):983-98. PubMed ID: 25514451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Effects of noise, nonlinear processing, and linear filtering on perceived speech quality.
Arehart KH; Kates JM; Anderson MC
Ear Hear; 2010 Jun; 31(3):420-36. PubMed ID: 20440116
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Cortical auditory-evoked potentials (CAEPs) in adults in response to filtered speech stimuli.
Carter L; Dillon H; Seymour J; Seeto M; Van Dun B
J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Oct; 24(9):807-22. PubMed ID: 24224988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effects of Modified Hearing Aid Fittings on Loudness and Tone Quality for Different Acoustic Scenes.
Moore BC; Baer T; Ives DT; Marriage J; Salorio-Corbetto M
Ear Hear; 2016; 37(4):483-91. PubMed ID: 26928003
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluation of the CAMEQ2-HF method for fitting hearing aids with multichannel amplitude compression.
Moore BC; Füllgrabe C
Ear Hear; 2010 Oct; 31(5):657-66. PubMed ID: 20526199
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
