These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

226 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1011005)

  • 1. Allocation of attention during visual word recognition.
    Becker CA
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1976 Nov; 2(4):556-66. PubMed ID: 1011005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Attentional resource demands of visual word recognition in naming and lexical decisions.
    Herdman CM
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1992 May; 18(2):460-70. PubMed ID: 1593230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The effect of visual task difficulty and attentional direction on the detection of acoustic change as indexed by the Mismatch Negativity.
    Muller-Gass A; Stelmack RM; Campbell KB
    Brain Res; 2006 Mar; 1078(1):112-30. PubMed ID: 16497283
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Lexical ambiguity and the timecourse of attentional allocation in word recognition.
    Kellas G; Ferraro FR; Simpson GB
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1988 Nov; 14(4):601-9. PubMed ID: 2974871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The effect of changing the secondary task in dual-task paradigms for measuring listening effort.
    Picou EM; Ricketts TA
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(6):611-22. PubMed ID: 24992491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Is lexical access autonomous? Evidence from combining overlapping tasks with recording event-related brain potentials.
    Rabovsky M; Alvarez CJ; Hohlfeld A; Sommer W
    Brain Res; 2008 Jul; 1222():156-65. PubMed ID: 18585684
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Attention-dependent allocation of auditory processing resources as measured by mismatch negativity.
    Dittmann-Balcar A; Thienel R; Schall U
    Neuroreport; 1999 Dec; 10(18):3749-53. PubMed ID: 10716203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effects of central processing on auditory recognition.
    Massaro DW; Kahn BJ
    J Exp Psychol; 1973 Jan; 97(1):51-8. PubMed ID: 4704196
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Attentional demands of visual word recognition.
    Herdman CM; Dobbs AR
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1989 Feb; 15(1):124-32. PubMed ID: 2522522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Are lexical decisions a good measure of lexical access? The role of word frequency in the neglected decision stage.
    Balota DA; Chumbley JI
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1984 Jun; 10(3):340-57. PubMed ID: 6242411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A dual-task investigation of automaticity in visual word processing.
    McCann RS; Remington RW; Van Selst M
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2000 Aug; 26(4):1352-70. PubMed ID: 10946719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Task difficulty modulates brain activation in the emotional oddball task.
    Siciliano RE; Madden DJ; Tallman CW; Boylan MA; Kirste I; Monge ZA; Packard LE; Potter GG; Wang L
    Brain Res; 2017 Jun; 1664():74-86. PubMed ID: 28377158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A dissociative word-frequency X levels-of-processing interaction in episodic recognition and lexical decision tasks.
    Duchek JM; Neely JH
    Mem Cognit; 1989 Mar; 17(2):148-62. PubMed ID: 2927313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Momentary fluctuations in allocation of attention: cross-modal effects of visual task load on auditory discrimination.
    Haroush K; Hochstein S; Deouell LY
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2010 Jul; 22(7):1440-51. PubMed ID: 19580389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Short-term retention of pictures and words: evidence for dual coding systems.
    Pellegrino JW; Siegel AW; Dhawan M
    J Exp Psychol Hum Learn; 1975 Mar; 104(2):95-102. PubMed ID: 1141833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. More insight into the interplay of response selection and visual attention in dual-tasks: masked visual search and response selection are performed in parallel.
    Reimer CB; Schubert T
    Psychol Res; 2019 Apr; 83(3):459-475. PubMed ID: 28917014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Processing capacity in a letter-matching task.
    Comstock EM
    J Exp Psychol; 1973 Sep; 100(1):63-72. PubMed ID: 4744501
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Influence of neighborhood size and exposure duration on visual-word recognition: evidence with the yes/no and the go/no-go lexical decision tasks.
    Perea M; Rosa E; Gómez C
    Percept Psychophys; 2003 Feb; 65(2):273-86. PubMed ID: 12713243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Evidence for the auditory P3a reflecting an automatic process: elicitation during highly-focused continuous visual attention.
    Muller-Gass A; Macdonald M; Schröger E; Sculthorpe L; Campbell K
    Brain Res; 2007 Sep; 1170():71-8. PubMed ID: 17692834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Is visual attention required for robust picture memory?
    Wolfe JM; Horowitz TS; Michod KO
    Vision Res; 2007 Mar; 47(7):955-64. PubMed ID: 17306854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.