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 *

218 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37580454)

  • 1. Why are listeners hindered by talker variability?
    Luthra S
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2024 Feb; 31(1):104-121. PubMed ID: 37580454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Listener expectations and the perceptual accommodation of talker variability: A pre-registered replication.
    Luthra S; Saltzman D; Myers EB; Magnuson JS
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2021 Aug; 83(6):2367-2376. PubMed ID: 33948883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Talker familiarity and the accommodation of talker variability.
    Magnuson JS; Nusbaum HC; Akahane-Yamada R; Saltzman D
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2021 May; 83(4):1842-1860. PubMed ID: 33398658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Selecting among competing models of talker adaptation: Attention, cognition, and memory in speech processing efficiency.
    Kapadia AM; Perrachione TK
    Cognition; 2020 Nov; 204():104393. PubMed ID: 32688132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Distinct mechanisms for talker adaptation operate in parallel on different timescales.
    Choi JY; Kou RSN; Perrachione TK
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2022 Apr; 29(2):627-634. PubMed ID: 34731443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Time and information in perceptual adaptation to speech.
    Choi JY; Perrachione TK
    Cognition; 2019 Nov; 192():103982. PubMed ID: 31229740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Acoustic differences, listener expectations, and the perceptual accommodation of talker variability.
    Magnuson JS; Nusbaum HC
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2007 Apr; 33(2):391-409. PubMed ID: 17469975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Varying acoustic-phonemic ambiguity reveals that talker normalization is obligatory in speech processing.
    Choi JY; Hu ER; Perrachione TK
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2018 Apr; 80(3):784-797. PubMed ID: 29417449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Multiple sources of acoustic variation affect speech processing efficiency.
    Kapadia AM; Tin JAA; Perrachione TK
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2023 Jan; 153(1):209. PubMed ID: 36732274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effects of talker continuity and speech rate on auditory working memory.
    Lim SJ; Shinn-Cunningham BG; Perrachione TK
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2019 May; 81(4):1167-1177. PubMed ID: 30737757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Attention, task demands, and multitalker processing costs in speech perception.
    Saltzman D; Luthra S; Myers EB; Magnuson JS
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2021 Dec; 47(12):1673-1680. PubMed ID: 34881952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Multiple talker processing in autistic adult listeners.
    Alispahic S; Pellicano E; Cutler A; Antoniou M
    Sci Rep; 2024 Jun; 14(1):14698. PubMed ID: 38926416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Talker normalization in typical Cantonese-speaking listeners and congenital amusics: Evidence from event-related potentials.
    Shao J; Zhang C
    Neuroimage Clin; 2019; 23():101814. PubMed ID: 30978657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Speech perception in children with cochlear implants: effects of lexical difficulty, talker variability, and word length.
    Kirk KI; Hay-McCutcheon M; Sehgal ST; Miyamoto RT
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl; 2000 Dec; 185():79-81. PubMed ID: 11141016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Talker discontinuity disrupts attention to speech: Evidence from EEG and pupillometry.
    Lim SJ; Carter YD; Njoroge JM; Shinn-Cunningham BG; Perrachione TK
    Brain Lang; 2021 Oct; 221():104996. PubMed ID: 34358924
    [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. Some consequences of stimulus variability on speech processing by 2-month-old infants.
    Jusczyk PW; Pisoni DB; Mullennix J
    Cognition; 1992 Jun; 43(3):253-91. PubMed ID: 1643815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Non-native listeners' recognition of high-variability speech using PRESTO.
    Tamati TN; Pisoni DB
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2014 Oct; 25(9):869-92. PubMed ID: 25405842
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Noninvasive neurostimulation of left temporal lobe disrupts rapid talker adaptation in speech processing.
    Choi JY; Perrachione TK
    Brain Lang; 2019 Sep; 196():104655. PubMed ID: 31310963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.