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 *

274 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11082850)

  • 1. Modeling the effects of irrelevant speech on memory.
    Neath I
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2000 Sep; 7(3):403-23. PubMed ID: 11082850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Disruption of verbal STM by irrelevant speech, articulatory suppression, and manual tapping: do they have a common source?
    Larsen JD; Baddeley A
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2003 Nov; 56(8):1249-68. PubMed ID: 14578082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The phonological loop and the irrelevant speech effect: some comments on Neath (2000).
    Baddeley AD
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2000 Sep; 7(3):544-9. PubMed ID: 11082863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The effects of irrelevant speech and articulatory suppression on the serial recall of silently presented lipread digits.
    Divin W; Coyle K; James DT
    Br J Psychol; 2001 Nov; 92(Pt 4):593-616. PubMed ID: 11762863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Irrelevant speech impairs serial recall of verbal but not spatial items in children and adults.
    Leist L; Lachmann T; Schlittmeier SJ; Georgi M; Klatte M
    Mem Cognit; 2023 Feb; 51(2):307-320. PubMed ID: 36190658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Irrelevant speech eliminates the word length effect.
    Neath I; Surprenant AM; LeCompte DC
    Mem Cognit; 1998 Mar; 26(2):343-54. PubMed ID: 9584441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The irrelevant sound effect under articulatory suppression is a suffix effect even with five-item lists.
    Hanley JR; Shah N
    Memory; 2012 Jul; 20(5):415-9. PubMed ID: 22497740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Directly assessing the relationship between irrelevant speech and articulatory suppression.
    Neath I; Farley LA; Surprenant AM
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2003 Nov; 56(8):1269-78; discussion 1301-6. PubMed ID: 14578083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Manipulations of irrelevant information: suffix effects with articulatory suppression and irrelevant speech.
    Surprenant AM; LeCompte DC; Neath I
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2000 May; 53(2):325-48. PubMed ID: 10881609
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Irrelevant speech effects and statistical learning.
    Neath I; Guérard K; Jalbert A; Bireta TJ; Surprenant AM
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2009 Aug; 62(8):1551-9. PubMed ID: 19370483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Does articulatory suppression remove the irrelevant speech effect?
    Hanley JR
    Memory; 1997 May; 5(3):423-31. PubMed ID: 9231151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Irrelevant speech, articulatory suppression, and phonological similarity: a test of the phonological loop model and the feature model.
    Hanley JR; Bakopoulou E
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2003 Jun; 10(2):435-44. PubMed ID: 12921421
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. On the irrelevance of phonological similarity to the irrelevant speech effect.
    LeCompte DC; Shaibe DM
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 1997 Feb; 50(1):100-18. PubMed ID: 9080790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Similarities between the irrelevant sound effect and the suffix effect.
    Hanley JR; Bourgaize J
    Mem Cognit; 2018 Aug; 46(6):841-848. PubMed ID: 29600481
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The irrelevant sound effect under articulatory suppression: is it a suffix effect?
    Hanley JR; Hayes A
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2012 Mar; 38(2):482-7. PubMed ID: 21928934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Articulatory rehearsal and phonological storage in working memory.
    Longoni AM; Richardson JT; Aiello A
    Mem Cognit; 1993 Jan; 21(1):11-22. PubMed ID: 8433641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The phonological store of working memory: is it phonological and is it a store?
    Jones DM; Macken WJ; Nicholls AP
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2004 May; 30(3):656-74. PubMed ID: 15099134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. When does between-sequence phonological similarity promote irrelevant sound disruption?
    Marsh JE; Vachon F; Jones DM
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2008 Jan; 34(1):243-8. PubMed ID: 18194067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Immediate serial recall of words and nonwords: tests of the retrieval-based hypothesis.
    Saint-Aubin J; Poirier M
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2000 Jun; 7(2):332-40. PubMed ID: 10909142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Habituation to irrelevant speech: effects on a visual short-term memory task.
    Morris N; Jones DM
    Percept Psychophys; 1990 Mar; 47(3):291-7. PubMed ID: 2326151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.