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 *

211 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11414134)

  • 1. Visual search asymmetry: the influence of stimulus familiarity and low-level features.
    Shen J; Reingold EM
    Percept Psychophys; 2001 Apr; 63(3):464-75. PubMed ID: 11414134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Familiarity and pop-out in visual search.
    Wang Q; Cavanagh P; Green M
    Percept Psychophys; 1994 Nov; 56(5):495-500. PubMed ID: 7991347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The effect of familiarity on visual-search performance: evidence for learned basic features.
    Malinowski P; Hübner R
    Percept Psychophys; 2001 Apr; 63(3):458-63. PubMed ID: 11414133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Visual search asymmetry depends on target-distractor feature similarity: Is the asymmetry simply a result of distractor rejection speed?
    Zhang YR; Onyper S
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2020 Jan; 82(1):80-97. PubMed ID: 31359376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Local and global factors of similarity in visual search.
    von Grünau M; Dubé S; Galera C
    Percept Psychophys; 1994 May; 55(5):575-92. PubMed ID: 8008558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Target familiarity and visual working memory do not influence familiarity effect in visual search.
    Guo Z; Niu M; Wang Q
    Sci Rep; 2021 Apr; 11(1):7560. PubMed ID: 33828108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. You look familiar, but I don't care: Lure rejection in hybrid visual and memory search is not based on familiarity.
    Wolfe JM; Boettcher SE; Josephs EL; Cunningham CA; Drew T
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2015 Dec; 41(6):1576-87. PubMed ID: 26191615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. When is search for a static target among dynamic distractors efficient?
    Pinto Y; Olivers CN; Theeuwes J
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2006 Feb; 32(1):59-72. PubMed ID: 16478326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Learning in combined-feature search: specificity to orientation.
    Campana G; Casco C
    Percept Psychophys; 2003 Nov; 65(8):1197-207. PubMed ID: 14710955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Search, similarity, and integration of features between and within dimensions.
    Treisman A
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1991 Aug; 17(3):652-76. PubMed ID: 1834783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Asymmetries in visual search: an introduction.
    Wolfe JM
    Percept Psychophys; 2001 Apr; 63(3):381-9. PubMed ID: 11414127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Visual search asymmetries in motion and optic flow fields.
    Royden CS; Wolfe JM; Klempen N
    Percept Psychophys; 2001 Apr; 63(3):436-44. PubMed ID: 11414131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Orientation categories used in guidance of attention in visual search can differ in strength.
    Kong G; Alais D; Van der Burg E
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2017 Nov; 79(8):2246-2256. PubMed ID: 28733837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Visual search for global and local stimulus features.
    Saarinen J
    Perception; 1994; 23(2):237-43. PubMed ID: 7971102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The effects of target and distractor familiarity on visual search in anxious children: latent inhibition and novel pop-out.
    Lubow RE; Toren P; Laor N; Kaplan O
    J Anxiety Disord; 2000; 14(1):41-56. PubMed ID: 10770235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Intra- and cross-dimensional visual search for single-feature targets.
    Cohen A; Magen H
    Percept Psychophys; 1999 Feb; 61(2):291-307. PubMed ID: 10089762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Visual search for simple volumetric shapes.
    Brown JM; Weisstein N; May JG
    Percept Psychophys; 1992 Jan; 51(1):40-8. PubMed ID: 1549423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Driving attention with the top down: the relative contribution of target templates to the linear separability effect in the size dimension.
    Hodsoll J; Humphreys GW
    Percept Psychophys; 2001 Jul; 63(5):918-26. PubMed ID: 11521856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Attention in visual search: multiple search classes.
    Cheal M; Lyon DR
    Percept Psychophys; 1992 Aug; 52(2):113-38. PubMed ID: 1508619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Reaction time drifts identify objects of attention in pigeon visual search.
    Blough DS
    J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process; 1993 Apr; 19(2):107-20. PubMed ID: 8505592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.