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 *

500 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7860836)

  • 1. How young and old adults listen to and remember speech in noise.
    Pichora-Fuller MK; Schneider BA; Daneman M
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1995 Jan; 97(1):593-608. PubMed ID: 7860836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The Revised Speech Perception in Noise Test (R-SPIN) in a multiple signal-to-noise ratio paradigm.
    Wilson RH; McArdle R; Watts KL; Smith SL
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2012 Sep; 23(8):590-605. PubMed ID: 22967734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The effect of background babble on working memory in young and middle-aged adults.
    Neidleman MT; Wambacq I; Besing J; Spitzer JB; Koehnke J
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Mar; 26(3):220-8. PubMed ID: 25751691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Predictive Sentence Context Reduces Listening Effort in Older Adults With and Without Hearing Loss and With High and Low Working Memory Capacity.
    Hunter CR; Humes LE
    Ear Hear; 2022 Jul-Aug 01; 43(4):1164-1177. PubMed ID: 34983897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effects of Age and Working Memory Capacity on Speech Recognition Performance in Noise Among Listeners With Normal Hearing.
    Gordon-Salant S; Cole SS
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(5):593-602. PubMed ID: 27232071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Word recognition for temporally and spectrally distorted materials: the effects of age and hearing loss.
    Smith SL; Pichora-Fuller MK; Wilson RH; Macdonald EN
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(3):349-66. PubMed ID: 22343546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Extrinsic Cognitive Load Impairs Spoken Word Recognition in High- and Low-Predictability Sentences.
    Hunter CR; Pisoni DB
    Ear Hear; 2018; 39(2):378-389. PubMed ID: 28945658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A Sequential Sentence Paradigm Using Revised PRESTO Sentence Lists.
    Plotkowski AR; Alexander JM
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2016 Sep; 27(8):647-60. PubMed ID: 27564442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Cognitive Function Prediction of Performance During Dual-Tasks Across Adults With and Without Hearing Loss.
    Harvey J; Seeman S; von Hapsburg D
    Curr Aging Sci; 2018; 11(3):155-164. PubMed ID: 30543178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Cognitive load during speech perception in noise: the influence of age, hearing loss, and cognition on the pupil response.
    Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Festen JM
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(4):498-510. PubMed ID: 21233711
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. In a Concurrent Memory and Auditory Perception Task, the Pupil Dilation Response Is More Sensitive to Memory Load Than to Auditory Stimulus Characteristics.
    Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Rönnberg J; Rudner M
    Ear Hear; 2019; 40(2):272-286. PubMed ID: 29923867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Development of the Word Auditory Recognition and Recall Measure: A Working Memory Test for Use in Rehabilitative Audiology.
    Smith SL; Pichora-Fuller MK; Alexander G
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(6):e360-e376. PubMed ID: 27438869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The Effects of Task Difficulty Predictability and Noise Reduction on Recall Performance and Pupil Dilation Responses.
    Micula A; Rönnberg J; Fiedler L; Wendt D; Jørgensen MC; Larsen DK; Ng EHN
    Ear Hear; 2021 Nov-Dec 01; 42(6):1668-1679. PubMed ID: 33859121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The influence of age, hearing, and working memory on the speech comprehension benefit derived from an automatic speech recognition system.
    Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Kessens JM; Vlaming MS; Houtgast T
    Ear Hear; 2009 Apr; 30(2):262-72. PubMed ID: 19194286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The influence of semantically related and unrelated text cues on the intelligibility of sentences in noise.
    Zekveld AA; Rudner M; Johnsrude IS; Festen JM; van Beek JH; Rönnberg J
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(6):e16-25. PubMed ID: 21826004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Selected cognitive factors and speech recognition performance among young and elderly listeners.
    Gordon-Salant S; Fitzgibbons PJ
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 1997 Apr; 40(2):423-31. PubMed ID: 9130210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Text Captioning Buffers Against the Effects of Background Noise and Hearing Loss on Memory for Speech.
    Payne BR; Silcox JW; Crandell HA; Lash A; Ferguson SH; Lohani M
    Ear Hear; 2022; 43(1):115-127. PubMed ID: 34260436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Speech recognition in noise and presbycusis: relations to possible neural mechanisms.
    Frisina DR; Frisina RD
    Hear Res; 1997 Apr; 106(1-2):95-104. PubMed ID: 9112109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. How Do We Allocate Our Resources When Listening and Memorizing Speech in Noise? A Pupillometry Study.
    Bönitz H; Lunner T; Finke M; Fiedler L; Lyxell B; Riis SK; Ng E; Valdes AL; Büchner A; Wendt D
    Ear Hear; 2021; 42(4):846-859. PubMed ID: 33492008
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The Impact of Age, Background Noise, Semantic Ambiguity, and Hearing Loss on Recognition Memory for Spoken Sentences.
    Koeritzer MA; Rogers CS; Van Engen KJ; Peelle JE
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2018 Mar; 61(3):740-751. PubMed ID: 29450493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 25.