No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Factors influencing recognition of interrupted speech
1.ANSI (1996). “Specifications for audiometers,” ANSI S3.6-1996 (American National Standards Inst., New York).
2.ANSI (1999). “Maximum permissible ambient levels for audiometric test rooms,” ANSI S3.1-1999 (American National Standards Inst., New York).
3.ANSI (2004). “Specification for audiometers,” ANSI S3.6-2004 (American National Standards Inst., New York).
4.Assmann, P. F. (1999). “Fundamental frequency and the intelligibility of competing voices,” in Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, San Francisco, CA, 1–7 August, 179–182.
5.Baayen, R. H. , Piepenbrock, R. , and Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX Lexical Database (CD-ROM) (University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia).
6.Bashford, J. , Jr., and Warren, R. (1987). “Effects of spectral alternation on the intelligibility of words and sentences,” Percept. Psychophys. 42, 431–438.
7.Bashford, J. A. , Riener, K. R. , and Warren, R. M. (1992). “Increasing the intelligibility of speech through multiple phonemic restorations,” Percept. Psychophys. 51, 211–217.
9.Bradlow, A. R. , Kraus, N. , and Hayes, E. (2003). “Speaking clearly for children with learning disabilities: Sentence perception in noise,” J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 46, 80–97.
10.Bradlow, A. R. , Torretta, G. M. , and Pisoni, D. B. (1996). “Intelligibility of normal speech I: Global and fine-grained acoustic-phonetic talker characteristics,” Speech Commun. 20, 255–272.
13.Dirks, D. D. , and Bower, D. (1970). “Effect of forward and backward masking on speech intelligibility,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 47, 1003–1008.
14.Dirks, D. D. , Takayanagi, S. , and Moshfegh, A. (2001). “Effects of lexical factors on word recognition among normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners,” J. Am. Acad. Audiol 12, 233–244.
16.Drullman, R. , Festen, J. M. , and Plomp, R. (1994a). “Effect of temporal envelope smearing on speech perception,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95, 1053–1064.
17.Drullman, R. , Festen, J. M. , and Plomp, R. (1994b). “Effects of reducing slow temporal modulations on speech reception,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95, 2670–2680.
18.Ferguson, S. H. (2004). “Talker differences in clear and conversational speech: Vowel intelligibility for normal-hearing listeners,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 116, 2365–2373.
20.French, N. R. , and Steinberg, J. C. (1947). “Factors governing the intelligibility of speech sounds,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 19, 90–119.
21.Gareth Gaskell William, M. G. , and Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1997). “Integrating form and meaning: A distributed model of speech perception,” Lang. Cognit. Processes 12, 613–656.
22.Gilbert, G. , Bergeras, I. , Voillery, D. , and Lorenzi, C. (2007). “Effects of periodic interruptions on the intelligibility of speech based on temporal fine-structure or envelope cues,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122, 1336–1339.
24.Huggins, A. W. F. (1975). “Temporally segmented speech,” Percept. Psychophys. 18, 149–157.
25.Kawahara, H. , Masuda-Katsuse, I. , and de Cheveign, A. (1999). “Restructuring speech representations using a pitch-adaptive time-frequency smoothing and an instantaneous-frequency-based F0 extraction: Possible role of a repetitive structure in sounds,” Speech Commun. 27, 187–207.
26.Kwon, B. J. , and Turner, C. W. (2001). “Consonant identification under maskers with sinusoidal modulation: Masking release or modulation interference?” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 110, 1130–1140.
33.Nelson, P. , and Jin, S. (2004). “Factors affecting speech understanding in gated interference: Cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 115, 2286–2294.
35.Powers, G. L. , and Wilcox, J. C. (1977). “Intelligibility of temporally interrupted speech with and without intervening noise,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 61, 195–199.
36.Shannon, R. V. , Zeng, F. -G. , Kamath, V. , Wygonski, J. , and Ekelid, M. (1995). “Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues,” Science 270, 303–304.
37.Sheft, S. , and Yost, W. A. (2006) “Modulation detection interference as informational masking,” in Hearing: From Basic Research to Applications, edited by B. Kollmeier, G. Klump, V. Hohmann, U. Langemann, S. Uppenkamp, and J. Verhey (Springer Verlag, New York).
38.Studebaker, G. A. (1985). “A ‘rationalized’ arcsine transform,” J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 28, 455–462.
39.Studebaker, G. A. , Sherbecoe, R. L. , McDaniel, D. M. , and Gwaltney, C. A. (1999). “Monosyllabic word recognition at higher-than-normal speech and noise levels,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 105, 2431–2444.
40.Takayanagi, S. , Dirks, D. D. , and Moshfegh, A. (2002). “Lexical and talker effects on word recognition among native and non-native listeners with normal and impaired hearing,” J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 45, 585–597.
41.Van Tasell, D. J. , Soli, S. D. , Kirby, V. M. , and Widin, G. P. (1987). “Speech waveform envelope cues for consonant recognition,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 82, 1152–1161.
42.Verschuure, J. , and Brocaar, M. P. (1983). “Intelligibility of interrupted meaningful and nonsense speech with and without intervening noise,” Percept. Psychophys. 33, 232–240.
44.Wingfield, A. , Aberdeen, J. S. , and Stine, E. A. L. (1991). “Word onset gating and linguistic context in spoken word recognition by young and elderly adults,” J. Gerontol. 46, 127–129.
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...
Most read this month