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 *

47 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 753826)

  • 1. Tactile perception of stress and intonation.
    Hawes MD
    J Aud Res; 1978 Apr; 18(2):141-5. PubMed ID: 753826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Development of the Listening in Spatialized Noise-Sentences Test (LISN-S).
    Cameron S; Dillon H
    Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2):196-211. PubMed ID: 17496671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Single-channel vibrotactile supplements to visual perception of intonation and stress.
    Bernstein LE; Eberhardt SP; Demorest ME
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1989 Jan; 85(1):397-405. PubMed ID: 2522107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Speech perception using combinations of auditory, visual, and tactile information.
    Blamey PJ; Cowan RS; Alcantara JI; Whitford LA; Clark GM
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 1989; 26(1):15-24. PubMed ID: 2521904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Production and perception of speech intonation in pediatric cochlear implant recipients and individuals with normal hearing.
    Peng SC; Tomblin JB; Turner CW
    Ear Hear; 2008 Jun; 29(3):336-51. PubMed ID: 18344873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Vibrotactile perception of suprasegmental features of speech: a comparison of single-channel and multichannel instruments.
    Carney AE; Beachler CR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1986 Jan; 79(1):131-40. PubMed ID: 3944340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The effect of training on discrimination of vibrotactual speech stimuli.
    Hurley RM
    J Aud Res; 1982 Jan; 22(1):45-50. PubMed ID: 7187909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Temporal and spatio-temporal vibrotactile displays for voice fundamental frequency: an initial evaluation of a new vibrotactile speech perception aid with normal-hearing and hearing-impaired individuals.
    Auer ET; Bernstein LE; Coulter DC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1998 Oct; 104(4):2477-89. PubMed ID: 10491709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Continuing evaluation of the Queen's University tactile vocoder II: Identification of open set sentences and tracking narrative.
    Brooks PL; Frost BJ; Mason JL; Gibson DM
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 1986 Jan; 23(1):129-38. PubMed ID: 3958994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The development of the text reception threshold test: a visual analogue of the speech reception threshold test.
    Zekveld AA; George EL; Kramer SE; Goverts ST; Houtgast T
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Jun; 50(3):576-84. PubMed ID: 17538101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effects of hearing loss and spectral shaping on identification and neural response patterns of stop-consonant stimuli in young adults.
    Harkrider AW; Plyler PN; Hedrick MS
    Ear Hear; 2009 Feb; 30(1):31-42. PubMed ID: 19125025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effect of masker modulation depth on speech masking release.
    Gnansia D; Jourdes V; Lorenzi C
    Hear Res; 2008 May; 239(1-2):60-8. PubMed ID: 18434049
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Practice effects for normal listeners' performance on a nonsense syllable test.
    Edgerton BJ; Danhauer JL; Rizzo S
    J Aud Res; 1981 Apr; 21(2):125-31. PubMed ID: 7052802
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Speech recognition in noise: estimating effects of compressive nonlinearities in the basilar-membrane response.
    Horwitz AR; Ahlstrom JB; Dubno JR
    Ear Hear; 2007 Sep; 28(5):682-93. PubMed ID: 17804982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effect of training on word-recognition performance in noise for young normal-hearing and older hearing-impaired listeners.
    Burk MH; Humes LE; Amos NE; Strauser LE
    Ear Hear; 2006 Jun; 27(3):263-78. PubMed ID: 16672795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Auditory speech recognition and visual text recognition in younger and older adults: similarities and differences between modalities and the effects of presentation rate.
    Humes LE; Burk MH; Coughlin MP; Busey TA; Strauser LE
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Apr; 50(2):283-303. PubMed ID: 17463230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Speech perception abilities of children with cochlear implants, tactile aids, or hearing aids.
    Osberger MJ; Robbins AM; Miyamoto RT; Berry SW; Myres WA; Kessler KS; Pope ML
    Am J Otol; 1991; 12 Suppl():105-15. PubMed ID: 2069171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The benefit obtained from visually displayed text from an automatic speech recognizer during listening to speech presented in noise.
    Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Kessens JM; Vlaming MS; Houtgast T
    Ear Hear; 2008 Dec; 29(6):838-52. PubMed ID: 18633325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The listening in spatialized noise-sentences test (LISN-S): test-retest reliability study.
    Cameron S; Dillon H
    Int J Audiol; 2007 Mar; 46(3):145-53. PubMed ID: 17365068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Does the sight of physical threat induce a tactile processing bias? Modality-specific attentional facilitation induced by viewing threatening pictures.
    Van Damme S; Gallace A; Spence C; Crombez G; Moseley GL
    Brain Res; 2009 Feb; 1253():100-6. PubMed ID: 19094970
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 3.