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

615 related items for PubMed ID: 28372143

  • 1. The effect of nearby maskers on speech intelligibility in reverberant, multi-talker environments.
    Westermann A, Buchholz JM.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Mar; 141(3):2214. PubMed ID: 28372143
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. The influence of informational masking in reverberant, multi-talker environments.
    Westermann A, Buchholz JM.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Aug; 138(2):584-93. PubMed ID: 26328677
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Phoneme recognition in vocoded maskers by normal-hearing and aided hearing-impaired listeners.
    Phatak SA, Grant KW.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Aug; 136(2):859-66. PubMed ID: 25096119
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. The influence of masker type on early reflection processing and speech intelligibility (L).
    Arweiler I, Buchholz JM, Dau T.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Jan; 133(1):13-6. PubMed ID: 23297878
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. An examination of speech reception thresholds measured in a simulated reverberant cafeteria environment.
    Best V, Keidser G, Buchholz JM, Freeston K.
    Int J Audiol; 2015 Jan; 54(10):682-90. PubMed ID: 25853616
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Benefits of Acoustic Beamforming for Solving the Cocktail Party Problem.
    Kidd G, Mason CR, Best V, Swaminathan J.
    Trends Hear; 2015 Jun 30; 19():. PubMed ID: 26126896
    [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 30; 50(1):2-13. PubMed ID: 21091261
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Acoustic and perceptual effects of magnifying interaural difference cues in a simulated "binaural" hearing aid.
    de Taillez T, Grimm G, Kollmeier B, Neher T.
    Int J Audiol; 2018 Jun 30; 57(sup3):S81-S91. PubMed ID: 28395561
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Relationship between masking release in fluctuating maskers and speech reception thresholds in stationary noise.
    Christiansen C, Dau T.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep 30; 132(3):1655-66. PubMed ID: 22978894
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Effects of attention on the speech reception threshold and pupil response of people with impaired and normal hearing.
    Koelewijn T, Versfeld NJ, Kramer SE.
    Hear Res; 2017 Oct 30; 354():56-63. PubMed ID: 28869841
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Sentence intelligibility during segmental interruption and masking by speech-modulated noise: Effects of age and hearing loss.
    Fogerty D, Ahlstrom JB, Bologna WJ, Dubno JR.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Jun 30; 137(6):3487-501. PubMed ID: 26093436
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Speech reception with different bilateral directional processing schemes: Influence of binaural hearing, audiometric asymmetry, and acoustic scenario.
    Neher T, Wagener KC, Latzel M.
    Hear Res; 2017 Sep 30; 353():36-48. PubMed ID: 28783570
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Binaural speech intelligibility in rooms with variations in spatial location of sources and modulation depth of noise interferers.
    Collin B, Lavandier M.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Aug 30; 134(2):1146-59. PubMed ID: 23927114
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Extension and evaluation of a near-end listening enhancement algorithm for listeners with normal and impaired hearing.
    Rennies J, Drefs J, Hülsmeier D, Schepker H, Doclo S.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Apr 30; 141(4):2526. PubMed ID: 28464693
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Native and Non-native Speech Perception by Hearing-Impaired Listeners in Noise- and Speech Maskers.
    Kilman L, Zekveld A, Hällgren M, Rönnberg J.
    Trends Hear; 2015 Apr 24; 19():. PubMed ID: 25910504
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. The role of interaural differences on speech intelligibility in complex multi-talker environments.
    Ellinger RL, Jakien KM, Gallun FJ.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Feb 24; 141(2):EL170. PubMed ID: 28253635
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. 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 24; 133(5):3004-15. PubMed ID: 23654404
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Effect of Energy Equalization on the Intelligibility of Speech in Fluctuating Background Interference for Listeners With Hearing Impairment.
    D'Aquila LA, Desloge JG, Reed CM, Braida LD.
    Trends Hear; 2017 May 24; 21():2331216517710354. PubMed ID: 28602128
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Detection threshold for sound distortion resulting from noise reduction in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Brons I, Dreschler WA, Houben R.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Sep 24; 136(3):1375. PubMed ID: 25190410
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. 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 24; 125(5):3358-72. PubMed ID: 19425676
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 31.