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.
112 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11424649)
1. A paradoxical exposure-duration effect in the Stroop task: temporal segregation between stimulus attributes facilitates selection. La Heij W; van der Heijden AH; Plooij P J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2001 Jun; 27(3):622-32. PubMed ID: 11424649 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Attentional selection of objects or features: evidence from a modified search task. Mounts JR; Melara RD Percept Psychophys; 1999 Feb; 61(2):322-41. PubMed ID: 10089764 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Reducing color-color interference by optimizing selection for action. La Heij W; Kaptein NA; Kalff AC; de Lange L Psychol Res; 1995; 57(2):119-30. PubMed ID: 7708897 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The influence of temporal selection on spatial selection and distractor interference: an attentional blink study. Jiang Y; Chun MM J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2001 Jun; 27(3):664-79. PubMed ID: 11424653 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Time course analysis of the Stroop phenomenon. Glaser MO; Glaser WR J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1982 Dec; 8(6):875-94. PubMed ID: 6218237 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Dilution of compatibility effects in Simon-type tasks depends on categorical similarity between distractors and diluters. Miles JD; Yamaguchi M; Proctor RW Atten Percept Psychophys; 2009 Oct; 71(7):1598-606. PubMed ID: 19801619 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Attention and facilitation: converging information versus inadvertent reading in Stroop task performance. Roelofs A J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2010 Mar; 36(2):411-22. PubMed ID: 20192539 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The effect of stroop interference on the categorical perception of color. Wiggett JA; Davies IR Mem Cognit; 2008 Mar; 36(2):231-9. PubMed ID: 18426057 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Interference effects in the Stroop and Simon paradigms. O'Leary MJ; Barber PJ J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1993 Aug; 19(4):830-44. PubMed ID: 8409861 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A dissociation between attention and selection. Remington RW; Folk CL Psychol Sci; 2001 Nov; 12(6):511-5. PubMed ID: 11760140 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Stroop process dissociations: the relationship between facilitation and interference. Lindsay DS; Jacoby LL J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1994 Apr; 20(2):219-34. PubMed ID: 8189189 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Verbal coding and the elimination of Stroop interference in a matching task. Mascolo MF; Hirtle SC Am J Psychol; 1990; 103(2):195-215. PubMed ID: 2349976 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Interactions between color and word processing in a flanker task. Henik A; Ro T; Merrill D; Rafal R; Safadi Z J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1999 Feb; 25(1):198-209. PubMed ID: 10069032 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Attending to an object's color entails attending to its location: support for location-special views of visual attention. Tsal Y; Lamy D Percept Psychophys; 2000 Jul; 62(5):960-8. PubMed ID: 10997042 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A confluence of contexts: asymmetric versus global failures of selective attention to stroop dimensions. Sabri M; Melara RD; Algom D J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2001 Jun; 27(3):515-37. PubMed ID: 11424642 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]