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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

651 related items for PubMed ID: 18434049

  • 1. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Masking release for consonant features in temporally fluctuating background noise.
    Füllgrabe C, Berthommier F, Lorenzi C.
    Hear Res; 2006 Jan; 211(1-2):74-84. PubMed ID: 16289579
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Speech masking release in listeners with flat hearing loss: effects of masker fluctuation rate on identification scores and phonetic feature reception.
    Lorenzi C, Husson M, Ardoint M, Debruille X.
    Int J Audiol; 2006 Sep; 45(9):487-95. PubMed ID: 17005491
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Estimates of basilar-membrane nonlinearity effects on masking of tones and speech.
    Dubno JR, Horwitz AR, Ahlstrom JB.
    Ear Hear; 2007 Feb; 28(1):2-17. PubMed ID: 17204895
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Phoneme recognition in modulated maskers by normal-hearing and aided hearing-impaired listeners.
    Phatak SA, Grant KW.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1646-54. PubMed ID: 22978893
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Comparison of fluctuating maskers for speech recognition tests.
    Francart T, van Wieringen A, Wouters J.
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Jan; 50(1):2-13. PubMed ID: 21091261
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Speech recognition in fluctuating and continuous maskers: effects of hearing loss and presentation level.
    Summers V, Molis MR.
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2004 Apr; 47(2):245-56. PubMed ID: 15157127
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Benefit of temporal fine structure to speech perception in noise measured with controlled temporal envelopes.
    Eaves JM, Summerfield AQ, Kitterick PT.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jul; 130(1):501-7. PubMed ID: 21786915
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Auditory and auditory-visual intelligibility of speech in fluctuating maskers for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Bernstein JG, Grant KW.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 May; 125(5):3358-72. PubMed ID: 19425676
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Effects of spectral smearing and temporal fine structure degradation on speech masking release.
    Gnansia D, Péan V, Meyer B, Lorenzi C.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Jun; 125(6):4023-33. PubMed ID: 19507983
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Effects of periodic masker interruption on the intelligibility of interrupted speech.
    Iyer N, Brungart DS, Simpson BD.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Sep; 122(3):1693. PubMed ID: 17927429
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Voice segregation by difference in fundamental frequency: evidence for harmonic cancellation.
    Deroche ML, Culling JF.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Nov; 130(5):2855-65. PubMed ID: 22087914
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Factors affecting psychophysical tuning curves for normally hearing subjects.
    Kluk K, Moore BC.
    Hear Res; 2004 Aug; 194(1-2):118-34. PubMed ID: 15276683
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Speech identification in noise: Contribution of temporal, spectral, and visual speech cues.
    Kim J, Davis C, Groot C.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Dec; 126(6):3246-57. PubMed ID: 20000938
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Relations between frequency selectivity, temporal fine-structure processing, and speech reception in impaired hearing.
    Strelcyk O, Dau T.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 May; 125(5):3328-45. PubMed ID: 19425674
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Selectivity of modulation interference for consonant identification in normal-hearing listeners.
    Apoux F, Bacon SP.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Mar; 123(3):1665-72. PubMed ID: 18345854
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Two-tone auditory suppression in younger and older normal-hearing adults and its relationship to speech perception in noise.
    Sommers MS, Gehr SE.
    Hear Res; 2010 Jun 01; 264(1-2):56-62. PubMed ID: 20006694
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. The interpretation of speech reception threshold data in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners: II. Fluctuating noise.
    Smits C, Festen JM.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 May 01; 133(5):3004-15. PubMed ID: 23654404
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Effect of amplitude modulation of background noise on auditory-evoked magnetic fields.
    Hiraumi H, Nagamine T, Morita T, Naito Y, Fukuyama H, Ito J.
    Brain Res; 2008 Nov 06; 1239():191-7. PubMed ID: 18778694
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 33.