Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 120

1.

Cognitive processing load during listening is reduced more by decreasing voice similarity than by increasing spatial separation between target and masker speech.

Zekveld AA, Rudner M, Kramer SE, Lyzenga J, Rönnberg J.

Front Neurosci. 2014 Apr 29;8:88. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2014.00088. eCollection 2014.

2.

Pupil dilation uncovers extra listening effort in the presence of a single-talker masker.

Koelewijn T, Zekveld AA, Festen JM, Kramer SE.

Ear Hear. 2012 Mar-Apr;33(2):291-300. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3182310019.

PMID:
21921797
3.

Effect of priming on energetic and informational masking in a same-different task.

Jones JA, Freyman RL.

Ear Hear. 2012 Jan-Feb;33(1):124-33. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31822b5bee.

4.

Processing load induced by informational masking is related to linguistic abilities.

Koelewijn T, Zekveld AA, Festen JM, Rönnberg J, Kramer SE.

Int J Otolaryngol. 2012;2012:865731. doi: 10.1155/2012/865731. Epub 2012 Oct 3.

5.

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 Jul-Aug;32(4):498-510. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31820512bb.

PMID:
21233711
6.

Effect of harmonicity on the detection of a signal in a complex masker and on spatial release from masking.

Klinge A, Beutelmann R, Klump GM.

PLoS One. 2011;6(10):e26124. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0026124. Epub 2011 Oct 18.

7.

Release from informational masking in a monaural competing-speech task with vocoded copies of the maskers presented contralaterally.

Bernstein JG, Iyer N, Brungart DS.

J Acoust Soc Am. 2015 Feb;137(2):702-13. doi: 10.1121/1.4906167.

PMID:
25698005
8.

The intelligibility of speech in a harmonic masker varying in fundamental frequency contour, broadband temporal envelope, and spatial location.

Leclère T, Lavandier M, Deroche MLD.

Hear Res. 2017 Jul;350:1-10. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2017.03.012. Epub 2017 Mar 29.

PMID:
28390253
9.

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. pii: 2331216515579127. doi: 10.1177/2331216515579127.

10.
11.

Age-related changes in listening effort for various types of masker noises.

Desjardins JL, Doherty KA.

Ear Hear. 2013 May-Jun;34(3):261-72. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31826d0ba4.

PMID:
23095723
12.

Spatial release from masking with noise-vocoded speech.

Freyman RL, Balakrishnan U, Helfer KS.

J Acoust Soc Am. 2008 Sep;124(3):1627-37. doi: 10.1121/1.2951964.

13.

Speech-on-speech masking with variable access to the linguistic content of the masker speech for native and nonnative english speakers.

Calandruccio L, Bradlow AR, Dhar S.

J Am Acad Audiol. 2014 Apr;25(4):355-66. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.25.4.7.

14.

Aging and speech-on-speech masking.

Helfer KS, Freyman RL.

Ear Hear. 2008 Jan;29(1):87-98.

15.

Cochlear implant speech recognition with speech maskers.

Stickney GS, Zeng FG, Litovsky R, Assmann P.

J Acoust Soc Am. 2004 Aug;116(2):1081-91.

PMID:
15376674
16.

Contributions of talker characteristics and spatial location to auditory streaming.

Allen K, Carlile S, Alais D.

J Acoust Soc Am. 2008 Mar;123(3):1562-70. doi: 10.1121/1.2831774.

PMID:
18345844
17.

Effectiveness of Two-Talker Maskers That Differ in Talker Congruity and Perceptual Similarity to the Target Speech.

Calandruccio L, Buss E, Bowdrie K.

Trends Hear. 2017 Jan-Dec;21:2331216517709385. doi: 10.1177/2331216517709385.

18.

The role of visual speech cues in reducing energetic and informational masking.

Helfer KS, Freyman RL.

J Acoust Soc Am. 2005 Feb;117(2):842-9.

PMID:
15759704
19.

The influence of informational masking on speech perception and pupil response in adults with hearing impairment.

Koelewijn T, Zekveld AA, Festen JM, Kramer SE.

J Acoust Soc Am. 2014 Mar;135(3):1596-606. doi: 10.1121/1.4863198.

PMID:
24606294
20.

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.

PMID:
17927429

Supplemental Content

Support Center