Connection

Judy Dubno to Perceptual Masking

This is a "connection" page, showing publications Judy Dubno has written about Perceptual Masking.
Connection Strength

6.941
  1. Talker identification: Effects of masking, hearing loss, and age. J Acoust Soc Am. 2018 02; 143(2):1085.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.557
  2. 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: 0.520
  3. 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: 0.508
  4. 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: 0.463
  5. 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: 0.413
  6. 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: 0.372
  7. 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: 0.361
  8. Individual differences in behavioral estimates of cochlear nonlinearities. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2012 Feb; 13(1):91-108.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.358
  9. 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: 0.313
  10. Speech recognition in noise: estimating effects of compressive nonlinearities in the basilar-membrane response. Ear Hear. 2007 Sep; 28(5):682-93.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.271
  11. Estimates of basilar-membrane nonlinearity effects on masking of tones and speech. Ear Hear. 2007 Feb; 28(1):2-17.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.260
  12. 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: 0.234
  13. 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: 0.234
  14. Recovery from prior stimulation: masking of speech by interrupted noise for younger and older adults with normal hearing. J Acoust Soc Am. 2003 Apr; 113(4 Pt 1):2084-94.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.199
  15. 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: 0.169
  16. 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: 0.159
  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: 0.143
  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: 0.131
  19. Effects of age and hearing loss on overshoot. J Acoust Soc Am. 2016 Oct; 140(4):2481.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.127
  20. 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: 0.122
  21. Masked thresholds and consonant recognition in low-pass maskers for hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am. 1995 Apr; 97(4):2430-41.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.114
  22. 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: 0.114
  23. 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: 0.101
  24. Comparison of frequency selectivity and consonant recognition among hearing-impaired and masked normal-hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am. 1992 Apr; 91(4 Pt 1):2110-21.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.093
  25. Frequency selectivity for hearing-impaired and broadband-noise-masked normal listeners. Q J Exp Psychol A. 1991 Aug; 43(3):543-64.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.089
  26. 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: 0.070
  27. 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: 0.062
  28. 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: 0.054
  29. 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: 0.049
  30. Benefit of modulated maskers for speech recognition by younger and older adults with normal hearing. J Acoust Soc Am. 2002 Jun; 111(6):2897-907.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.047
  31. Evidence for cortical adjustments to perceptual decision criteria during word recognition in noise. Neuroimage. 2022 06; 253:119042.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.046
  32. Use of context by young and aged adults with normal hearing. J Acoust Soc Am. 2000 Jan; 107(1):538-46.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.040
  33. Masking by ipsilateral and contralateral maskers. J Acoust Soc Am. 1996 Nov; 100(5):3336-44.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.032
  34. 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: 0.030
  35. Frequency selectivity and consonant recognition for hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners with equivalent masked thresholds. J Acoust Soc Am. 1995 Feb; 97(2):1165-74.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.028
  36. Associations among frequency and temporal resolution and consonant recognition for hearing-impaired listeners. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl. 1990; 469:23-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.020
  37. Auditory filter characteristics and consonant recognition for hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am. 1989 Apr; 85(4):1666-75.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.019
  38. Detection of tones in band-reject noise. J Speech Hear Res. 1981 Sep; 24(3):336-44.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.011
  39. Masking of auditory brainstem responses in young and aged gerbils. Hear Res. 1995 Sep; 89(1-2):1-13.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.007
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.