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 *

125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1202142)

  • 1. Stimulus familiarity modifies perceived duration in prerecognition visual processing.
    Avant LL; Lyman PJ
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1975 Aug; 1(3):205-13. PubMed ID: 1202142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Duration sensitivity depends on stimulus familiarity.
    Morewedge CK; Kassam KS; Hsee CK; Caruso EM
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2009 May; 138(2):177-86. PubMed ID: 19397378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Role of visual familiarity in the word-superiority effects obtained with the simultaneous-matching task.
    Bruder GA
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1978 Feb; 4(1):88-100. PubMed ID: 627853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The role of number and familiarity of stimuli in the perception of brief temporal intervals.
    Schiffman HR; Bobko DJ
    Am J Psychol; 1977 Mar; 90(1):85-93. PubMed ID: 871180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Judgments of synchrony between auditory and moving or still visual stimuli.
    Fouriezos G; Capstick G; Monette F; Bellemare C; Parkinson M; Dumoulin A
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2007 Dec; 61(4):277-92. PubMed ID: 18266504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The familiarity effect for single-letter pairs.
    Ambler BA; Proctor JD
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1976 May; 2(2):222-34. PubMed ID: 830185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Neuronal responses related to visual recognition.
    Rolls ET; Perrett DI; Caan AW; Wilson FA
    Brain; 1982 Dec; 105 (Pt 4)():611-46. PubMed ID: 6890395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Implicit word activation during prerecognition processing: false recognition and remember/know judgments.
    Wallace WP; Malone CP; Spoo AD
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2000 Mar; 7(1):149-57. PubMed ID: 10780029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. How do changes in speed affect the perception of duration?
    Matthews WJ
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2011 Oct; 37(5):1617-27. PubMed ID: 21517218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Complexity, incongruity, pre-exposure and the familiarity effect in visual selection.
    Lemond IC
    Percept Mot Skills; 1978 Feb; 46(1):99-106. PubMed ID: 643504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Language experience shapes early electrophysiological responses to visual stimuli: the effects of writing system, stimulus length, and presentation duration.
    Xue G; Jiang T; Chen C; Dong Q
    Neuroimage; 2008 Feb; 39(4):2025-37. PubMed ID: 18053744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Audiovisual synchrony perception for music, speech, and object actions.
    Vatakis A; Spence C
    Brain Res; 2006 Sep; 1111(1):134-42. PubMed ID: 16876772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Affective discrimination of stimuli that are not recognized: effects of shadowing, masking, and cerebral laterality.
    Seamon JG; Brody N; Kauff DM
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 1983 Jul; 9(3):544-55. PubMed ID: 6225833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Crossmodal attention switching: auditory dominance in temporal discrimination tasks.
    Lukas S; Philipp AM; Koch I
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2014 Nov; 153():139-46. PubMed ID: 25463554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Temporal judgments in multi-sensory space.
    Retsa C; Naish P; Bekinschtein T; Bak TH
    Neuropsychologia; 2016 Jul; 88():101-112. PubMed ID: 26898372
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Familiarity affects visual processing of words.
    Pollatsek A; Well AD; Schindler RM
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1975 Nov; 1(4):328-38. PubMed ID: 1185120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Exogenous visual attention prolongs perceived duration.
    Seifried T; Ulrich R
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2011 Jan; 73(1):68-85. PubMed ID: 21258910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Judgments of duration, figure-ground contrast, and size for words and nonwords.
    Reber R; Zimmermann TD; Wurtz P
    Percept Psychophys; 2004 Oct; 66(7):1105-14. PubMed ID: 15751469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The effect of nontemporal stimulus size on perceived duration as assessed by the method of reproduction.
    Rammsayer TH; Verner M
    J Vis; 2014 May; 14(5):17. PubMed ID: 24879864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The word-superiority effect does not require a T-scope.
    Prinzmetal W
    Percept Psychophys; 1992 May; 51(5):473-84. PubMed ID: 1594437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.