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 *

136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11827075)

  • 1. Capturing the suffix: cognitive streaming in immediate serial recall.
    Nicholls AP; Jones DM
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2002 Jan; 28(1):12-28. PubMed ID: 11827075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Serial recall of two-voice lists: implications for theories of auditory recency and suffix effects.
    Greene RL
    Mem Cognit; 1991 Jan; 19(1):72-8. PubMed ID: 2017031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Exploring the suffix effect in serial visuospatial short-term memory.
    Parmentier FB; Tremblay S; Jones DM
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2004 Apr; 11(2):289-95. PubMed ID: 15260195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Adapting to an irrelevant item in an immediate recall task.
    Watkins MJ; Sechler ES
    Mem Cognit; 1989 Nov; 17(6):682-92. PubMed ID: 2811665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Auditory attentional capture during serial recall: violations at encoding of an algorithm-based neural model?
    Hughes RW; Vachon F; Jones DM
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2005 Jul; 31(4):736-49. PubMed ID: 16060777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Children's suffix effects for verbal working memory reflect phonological coding and perceptual grouping.
    Lowenstein JH; Cribb C; Shell P; Yuan Y; Nittrouer S
    J Exp Child Psychol; 2019 Jul; 183():276-294. PubMed ID: 30933869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Echoic and retrieval accounts of the long-term modality effect tested using the suffix procedure.
    Huang ST; Glenberg AM
    Am J Psychol; 1986; 99(4):453-70. PubMed ID: 3812815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The importance of semantic similarity to the irrelevant speech effect.
    Neely CB; LeCompte DC
    Mem Cognit; 1999 Jan; 27(1):37-44. PubMed ID: 10087854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The modality effect and echoic persistence.
    Watkins OC; Watkins MJ
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 1980 Sep; 109(3):251-78. PubMed ID: 6447188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Grouping in primary memory: the case of the compound suffix.
    LeCompte DC; Watkins MJ
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 1995 Jan; 21(1):96-102. PubMed ID: 7876775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evidence of echoic memory with a multichannel cochlear prosthesis.
    Jerger S; Watkins MJ
    Ear Hear; 1988 Oct; 9(5):231-6. PubMed ID: 3224769
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Irrelevant speech and irrelevant tones: the relative importance of speech to the irrelevant speech effect.
    LeCompte DC; Neely CB; Wilson JR
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 1997 Mar; 23(2):472-83. PubMed ID: 9080015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Modalities of memory: is reading lips like hearing voices?
    Maidment DW; Macken B; Jones DM
    Cognition; 2013 Dec; 129(3):471-93. PubMed ID: 24041834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Perceptual organization and precategorical acoustic storage.
    Frankish C
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 1989 May; 15(3):469-479. PubMed ID: 2524546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Recency and suffix effects in serial recall of musical stimuli.
    Greene RL; Samuel AG
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 1986 Oct; 12(4):517-24. PubMed ID: 2945898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Recency and suffix effects as a function of auditory confusability and set size.
    Manning SK; Robinson II
    Am J Psychol; 1989; 102(4):495-510. PubMed ID: 2596615
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.