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 *

133 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36283276)

  • 21. Difficulties Experienced by Older Listeners in Utilizing Voice Cues for Speaker Discrimination.
    Zaltz Y; Kishon-Rabin L
    Front Psychol; 2022; 13():797422. PubMed ID: 35310278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Re-Examining the Effect of Top-Down Linguistic Information on Speaker-Voice Discrimination.
    Quinto A; Abu El Adas S; Levi SV
    Cogn Sci; 2020 Oct; 44(10):e12902. PubMed ID: 33025646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The processing of intimately familiar and unfamiliar voices: Specific neural responses of speaker recognition and identification.
    Plante-Hébert J; Boucher VJ; Jemel B
    PLoS One; 2021; 16(4):e0250214. PubMed ID: 33861789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. A method for calculating the strength of evidence associated with an earwitness's claimed recognition of a familiar speaker.
    Rosas C; Sommerhoff J; Morrison GS
    Sci Justice; 2019 Nov; 59(6):585-596. PubMed ID: 31606096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The Other Accent Effect in Talker Recognition: Now You See It, Now You Don't.
    Yu ME; Schertz J; Johnson EK
    Cogn Sci; 2021 Jun; 45(6):e12986. PubMed ID: 34170043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Glottal fry and voice disguise: a case study in forensic phonetics.
    Hirson A; Duckworth M
    J Biomed Eng; 1993 May; 15(3):193-200. PubMed ID: 8320978
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Euclidean Distances as measures of speaker similarity including identical twin pairs: A forensic investigation using source and filter voice characteristics.
    San Segundo E; Tsanas A; Gómez-Vilda P
    Forensic Sci Int; 2017 Jan; 270():25-38. PubMed ID: 27912151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. INTERPOL survey of the use of speaker identification by law enforcement agencies.
    Morrison GS; Sahito FH; Jardine G; Djokic D; Clavet S; Berghs S; Goemans Dorny C
    Forensic Sci Int; 2016 Jun; 263():92-100. PubMed ID: 27100858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. The effect of familiarity on within-person age judgements from voices.
    Lavan N
    Br J Psychol; 2022 Feb; 113(1):287-299. PubMed ID: 34415575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Highly accurate and robust identity perception from personally familiar voices.
    Kanber E; Lavan N; McGettigan C
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2022 Apr; 151(4):897-911. PubMed ID: 34672658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Refining the relevant population in forensic voice comparison - A response to Hicks et alii (2015) The importance of distinguishing information from evidence/observations when formulating propositions.
    Morrison GS; Enzinger E; Zhang C
    Sci Justice; 2016 Dec; 56(6):492-497. PubMed ID: 27914557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Speaker-individuality in suprasegmental temporal features: Implications for forensic voice comparison.
    Leemann A; Kolly MJ; Dellwo V
    Forensic Sci Int; 2014 May; 238():59-67. PubMed ID: 24675042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. The case for aural perceptual speaker identification.
    Hollien H; Didla G; Harnsberger JD; Hollien KA
    Forensic Sci Int; 2016 Dec; 269():8-20. PubMed ID: 27855301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Towards understanding speaker discrimination abilities in humans and machines for text-independent short utterances of different speech styles.
    Park SJ; Yeung G; Vesselinova N; Kreiman J; Keating PA; Alwan A
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2018 Jul; 144(1):375. PubMed ID: 30075658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Perception in Black and White: Effects of Intonational Variables and Filtering Conditions on Sociolinguistic Judgments With Implications for ASR.
    Holliday NR
    Front Artif Intell; 2021; 4():642783. PubMed ID: 34337391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Forensic Speaker Verification Using Ordinary Least Squares.
    Machado TJ; Vieira Filho J; de Oliveira MA
    Sensors (Basel); 2019 Oct; 19(20):. PubMed ID: 31658784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Analyzing nonverbal listener responses using parallel recordings of multiple listeners.
    de Kok I; Heylen D
    Cogn Process; 2012 Oct; 13 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):499-506. PubMed ID: 22350325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. [Speaker discrimination in cochlear implant users].
    Mühler R; Ziese M; Verhey JL
    HNO; 2017 Mar; 65(3):243-250. PubMed ID: 27538938
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Hierarchical contributions of linguistic knowledge to talker identification: Phonological versus lexical familiarity.
    McLaughlin DE; Carter YD; Cheng CC; Perrachione TK
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2019 May; 81(4):1088-1107. PubMed ID: 31218598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Breaking voice identity perception: Expressive voices are more confusable for listeners.
    Lavan N; Burston LF; Ladwa P; Merriman SE; Knight S; McGettigan C
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2019 Sep; 72(9):2240-2248. PubMed ID: 30808271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.