Connection

Judy Dubno to Noise

Back to Details
This is a "connection" page, showing publications Judy Dubno has written about Noise.
Judy Dubno
Connection Strength
8.727
Noise
  1. Sentence perception in noise by hearing-aid users predicted by syllable-constituent perception and the use of context. J Acoust Soc Am. 2020 01; 147(1):273.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.656
  2. Amplitude modulation detection with a short-duration carrier: Effects of a precursor and hearing loss. J Acoust Soc Am. 2018 04; 143(4):2232.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.581
  3. Talker identification: Effects of masking, hearing loss, and age. J Acoust Soc Am. 2018 02; 143(2):1085.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.574
  4. Simultaneous and forward masking of vowels and stop consonants: Effects of age, hearing loss, and spectral shaping. J Acoust Soc Am. 2017 02; 141(2):1133.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.536
  5. Glimpsing Speech in the Presence of Nonsimultaneous Amplitude Modulations From a Competing Talker: Effect of Modulation Rate, Age, and Hearing Loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2016 10 01; 59(5):1198-1207.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.523
  6. Sentence intelligibility during segmental interruption and masking by speech-modulated noise: Effects of age and hearing loss. J Acoust Soc Am. 2015 Jun; 137(6):3487-501.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.477
  7. Auditory-evoked cortical activity: contribution of brain noise, phase locking, and spectral power. J Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol. 2014 Sep; 25(3):277-84.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.453
  8. Perceived listening effort for a tonal task with contralateral competing signals. J Acoust Soc Am. 2013 Oct; 134(4):EL352-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.425
  9. Individual and level-dependent differences in masking for adults with normal and impaired hearing. J Acoust Soc Am. 2012 Apr; 131(4):EL323-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.383
  10. Level-dependent changes in detection of temporal gaps in noise markers by adults with normal and impaired hearing. J Acoust Soc Am. 2011 Nov; 130(5):2928-38.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.372
  11. Word recognition in noise at higher-than-normal levels: decreases in scores and increases in masking. J Acoust Soc Am. 2005 Aug; 118(2):914-22.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.241
  12. Recognition of filtered words in noise at higher-than-normal levels: decreases in scores with and without increases in masking. J Acoust Soc Am. 2005 Aug; 118(2):923-33.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.241
  13. Spectral contributions to the benefit from spatial separation of speech and noise. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2002 Dec; 45(6):1297-310.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.201
  14. Auditory brainstem responses in younger and older adults for broadband noises separated by a silent gap. Hear Res. 2001 Nov; 161(1-2):81-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.186
  15. Glimpsing keywords across sentences in noise: A microstructural analysis of acoustic, lexical, and listener factors. J Acoust Soc Am. 2021 09; 150(3):1979.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.184
  16. Comparing Speech Recognition for Listeners With Normal and Impaired Hearing: Simulations for Controlling Differences in Speech Levels and Spectral Shape. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2020 12 14; 63(12):4289-4299.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.174
  17. Age effects on perceptual organization of speech: Contributions of glimpsing, phonemic restoration, and speech segregation. J Acoust Soc Am. 2018 07; 144(1):267.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.148
  18. Syllable-constituent perception by hearing-aid users: Common factors in quiet and noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 2017 04; 141(4):2933.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.135
  19. Interaction of noise-induced permanent threshold shift and age-related threshold shift. J Acoust Soc Am. 1997 Mar; 101(3):1681-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.135
  20. Self-Assessed Hearing Handicap in Older Adults With Poorer-Than-Predicted Speech Recognition in Noise. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2017 01 01; 60(1):251-262.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.133
  21. Inherent envelope fluctuations in forward maskers: Effects of masker-probe delay for listeners with normal and impaired hearing. J Acoust Soc Am. 2016 Mar; 139(3):1195-203.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.126
  22. Task-Related Vigilance During Word Recognition in Noise for Older Adults with Hearing Loss. Exp Aging Res. 2016; 42(1):50-66.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.124
  23. Cingulo-Opercular Function During Word Recognition in Noise for Older Adults with Hearing Loss. Exp Aging Res. 2016; 42(1):67-82.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.124
  24. Cortical activity predicts which older adults recognize speech in noise and when. J Neurosci. 2015 Mar 04; 35(9):3929-37.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.117
  25. Effects of inherent envelope fluctuations in forward maskers for listeners with normal and impaired hearing. J Acoust Soc Am. 2015 Mar; 137(3):1336-43.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.117
  26. Spatial separation benefit for unaided and aided listening. Ear Hear. 2014 Jan-Feb; 35(1):72-85.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.108
  27. Age and measurement time-of-day effects on speech recognition in noise. Ear Hear. 2013 May-Jun; 34(3):288-99.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.103
  28. Audition assessment using the NIH Toolbox. Neurology. 2013 Mar 12; 80(11 Suppl 3):S45-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.102
  29. Level-dependent changes in perception of speech envelope cues. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2012 Dec; 13(6):835-52.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.098
  30. Human evoked cortical activity to silent gaps in noise: effects of age, attention, and cortical processing speed. Ear Hear. 2012 May-Jun; 33(3):330-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.096
  31. Age-related differences in gap detection: effects of task difficulty and cognitive ability. Hear Res. 2010 Jun 01; 264(1-2):21-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.081
  32. Spatial benefit of bilateral hearing AIDS. Ear Hear. 2009 Apr; 30(2):203-18.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.078
  33. Factors affecting the benefits of high-frequency amplification. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008 Jun; 51(3):798-813.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.073
  34. Binaural advantage for younger and older adults with normal hearing. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008 Apr; 51(2):539-56.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.073
  35. Estimates of basilar-membrane nonlinearity effects on masking of tones and speech. Ear Hear. 2007 Feb; 28(1):2-17.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.067
  36. Spectral and threshold effects on recognition of speech at higher-than-normal levels. J Acoust Soc Am. 2006 Jul; 120(1):310-20.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.064
  37. Effects of age and mild hearing loss on speech recognition in noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 1984 Jul; 76(1):87-96.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.056
  38. A procedure for quantifying the effects of noise on speech recognition. J Speech Hear Disord. 1982 May; 47(2):114-23.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.048
  39. Evidence for cortical adjustments to perceptual decision criteria during word recognition in noise. Neuroimage. 2022 06; 253:119042.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.048
  40. Assessment of Hearing Aid Benefit Using Patient-Reported Outcomes and Audiologic Measures. Audiol Neurootol. 2020; 25(4):215-223.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.042
  41. Cingulo-opercular adaptive control for younger and older adults during a challenging gap detection task. J Neurosci Res. 2020 04; 98(4):680-691.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.040
  42. Psychometric functions for gap detection in noise measured from young and aged subjects. J Acoust Soc Am. 1999 Aug; 106(2):966-78.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.040
  43. Effects of Age and Implanted Ear on Speech Recognition in Adults with Unilateral Cochlear Implants. Audiol Neurootol. 2016; 21(4):223-230.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.032
  44. Minimal upward spread of masking: correlations with speech and auditory brainstem response masked thresholds. J Acoust Soc Am. 1993 Jun; 93(6):3422-30.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.026
  45. Comparison of speech recognition-in-noise and subjective communication assessment. Ear Hear. 1985 Nov-Dec; 6(6):291-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.015
  46. Longitudinal study of pure-tone thresholds in older persons. Ear Hear. 2005 Feb; 26(1):1-11.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.015
  47. Predicting consonant confusions from acoustic analysis. J Acoust Soc Am. 1981 Jan; 69(1):249-61.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.011
  48. Acoustic-reflex thresholds for noise stimuli. J Acoust Soc Am. 1980 Sep; 68(3):892-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.011
  49. Comments on the acoustic-reflex response for bone-conducted signals. Acta Otolaryngol. 1978 Jul-Aug; 86(1-2):64-70.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.009
  50. Interaction of noise-induced hearing loss and presbyacusis. Scand Audiol Suppl. 1998; 48:117-22.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.009
  51. Growth of low-pass masking of pure tones and speech for hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am. 1995 Dec; 98(6):3113-24.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.008
  52. Masking of auditory brainstem responses in young and aged gerbils. Hear Res. 1995 Sep; 89(1-2):1-13.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.008
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.