Format
Sort by

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 206

1.

The influence of linguistic content on the Lombard effect.

Patel R, Schell KW.

J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008 Feb;51(1):209-20. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2008/016).

PMID:
18230867
2.

Development and evaluation of the listening in spatialized noise test.

Cameron S, Dillon H, Newall P.

Ear Hear. 2006 Feb;27(1):30-42.

PMID:
16446563
3.

Acoustic-phonetic correlates of talker intelligibility for adults and children.

Hazan V, Markham D.

J Acoust Soc Am. 2004 Nov;116(5):3108-18.

PMID:
15603156
4.

Listener ratings of the intelligibility of tracheoesophageal speech in noise.

McColl D, Fucci D, Petrosino L, Martin DE, McCaffrey P.

J Commun Disord. 1998 Jul-Aug;31(4):279-88; quiz 288-9.

PMID:
9697040
5.

Acoustic changes in the production of lexical stress during Lombard speech.

Arciuli J, Simpson BS, Vogel AP, Ballard KJ.

Lang Speech. 2014 Jun;57(Pt 2):149-62.

PMID:
25102603
6.
7.

The Lombard effect on alaryngeal speech.

Zeine L, Brandt JF.

J Commun Disord. 1988 Sep;21(5):373-83.

PMID:
3183082
8.

The effect of cue-enhancement on consonant intelligibility in noise: speaker and listener effects.

Hazan V, Simpson A.

Lang Speech. 2000 Jul-Sep;43(Pt 3):273-94.

PMID:
11216296
10.
11.

Communicating emotion: linking affective prosody and word meaning.

Nygaard LC, Queen JS.

J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2008 Aug;34(4):1017-30. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.34.4.1017.

PMID:
18665742
12.

The influence of selected masking noises on Lombard and sidetone amplification effects.

Garber SF, Siegel GM, Pick HL Jr.

J Speech Hear Res. 1976 Sep;19(3):523-35.

PMID:
979214
14.

Effects of noise and proficiency on intelligibility of Chinese-accented English.

Rogers CL, Dalby J, Nishi K.

Lang Speech. 2004;47(Pt 2):139-54.

PMID:
15581189
15.

Perception of spasmodic dysphonia speech in background noise.

McColl D, McCaffrey P.

Percept Mot Skills. 2006 Oct;103(2):629-35.

PMID:
17165426
16.

The effect of instantaneous input dynamic range setting on the speech perception of children with the nucleus 24 implant.

Davidson LS, Skinner MW, Holstad BA, Fears BT, Richter MK, Matusofsky M, Brenner C, Holden T, Birath A, Kettel JL, Scollie S.

Ear Hear. 2009 Jun;30(3):340-9. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31819ec93a.

PMID:
19322085
17.

The influence of tonal movement and vowel quality on intelligibility in singing.

Andreas T.

Logoped Phoniatr Vocol. 2006;31(1):17-22.

PMID:
16517520
18.

T'ain't the way you say it, it's what you say--perceptual continuity of voice and top-down restoration of speech.

Clarke J, Gaudrain E, Chatterjee M, Ba┼čkent D.

Hear Res. 2014 Sep;315:80-7. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2014.07.002.

PMID:
25019356
19.

Cross-linguistic comparison of frequency-following responses to voice pitch in American and Chinese neonates and adults.

Jeng FC, Hu J, Dickman B, Montgomery-Reagan K, Tong M, Wu G, Lin CD.

Ear Hear. 2011 Nov-Dec;32(6):699-707. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31821cc0df.

PMID:
21543983
20.

The listening in spatialized noise test: an auditory processing disorder study.

Cameron S, Dillon H, Newall P.

J Am Acad Audiol. 2006 May;17(5):306-20.

PMID:
16796298
Items per page

Supplemental Content

Support Center