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 *

78 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10220933)

  • 41. Contrasting effects of interference and of breaks in interval timing.
    Gaudreault R; Fortin C; Macar F
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2010 Jan; 133(1):3-16. PubMed ID: 19716109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Decision processes in models of timing.
    Wearden JH
    Acta Neurobiol Exp (Wars); 2004; 64(3):303-17. PubMed ID: 15283474
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. The effect of mild depression on time discrimination.
    Msetfi RM; Murphy RA; Kornbrot DE
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2012; 65(4):632-45. PubMed ID: 22313021
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Temporal integration in duration and number discrimination.
    Meck WH; Church RM; Gibbon J
    J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process; 1985 Oct; 11(4):591-7. PubMed ID: 4067512
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. A conjoint-measurement analysis of control by dimensions of compound stimuli.
    Rodewald HK
    Percept Mot Skills; 1974 Apr; 38(2):551-6. PubMed ID: 4824091
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Effects of visual flicker on subjective time in a temporal bisection task.
    Ortega L; López F
    Behav Processes; 2008 Jul; 78(3):380-6. PubMed ID: 18358636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Interval timing with gaps: gap ambiguity as an alternative to temporal decay.
    Zentall TR; Kaiser DH
    J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process; 2005 Oct; 31(4):484-6. PubMed ID: 16248734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Range effects in successive discrimination.
    Hinson JM; Lockhead GR
    J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process; 1986 Jul; 12(3):270-6. PubMed ID: 3734695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Stimulus complexity and prospective timing: clues for a parallel process model of time perception.
    Aubry F; Guillaume N; Mogicato G; Bergeret L; Celsis P
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2008 May; 128(1):63-74. PubMed ID: 18001688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Comparison of timing and classical conditioning.
    Holder MD; Roberts S
    J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process; 1985 Apr; 11(2):172-93. PubMed ID: 4009120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Time-sharing in pigeons: Independent effects of gap duration, position and discriminability from the timed signal.
    Buhusi CV; Paskalis JP; Cerutti DT
    Behav Processes; 2006 Feb; 71(2-3):116-25. PubMed ID: 16414210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Sensory modality and time perception in children and adults.
    Droit-Volet S; Meck WH; Penney TB
    Behav Processes; 2007 Feb; 74(2):244-50. PubMed ID: 17084041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Fechner's law: where does the log transform come from?
    Laming D
    Seeing Perceiving; 2010; 23(2):155-71. PubMed ID: 20550824
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Interrupting timing in interval production and discrimination: similarities and differences.
    Fortin C; Tremblay S
    Behav Processes; 2006 Feb; 71(2-3):336-43. PubMed ID: 16309854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Attention and entrainment: P3b varies as a function of temporal predictability.
    Schmidt-Kassow M; Schubotz RI; Kotz SA
    Neuroreport; 2009 Jan; 20(1):31-6. PubMed ID: 18987559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Comments on current ratio-setting models for time perception.
    Allan LG
    Percept Psychophys; 1978 Nov; 24(5):444-50. PubMed ID: 745931
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Time horizons of foraging animals.
    Krebs JR; Kacelnik A
    Ann N Y Acad Sci; 1984; 423():278-91. PubMed ID: 6588792
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. The use of limit theorems in paired comparison model building.
    Thompson WA; Singh J
    Psychometrika; 1967 Sep; 32(3):255-64. PubMed ID: 5235487
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Flawed Critique of CLSI Guideline EP05-A2.
    Ladwig PM; Vaks JE
    J Appl Lab Med; 2022 May; 7(3):815-817. PubMed ID: 35262679
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. In Reply to Flawed Critique of CLSI Guideline EP05-A2.
    Frenkel R; Farrance I
    J Appl Lab Med; 2022 May; 7(3):817-818. PubMed ID: 35262709
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.