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 *

69 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12192448)

  • 21. 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]  

  • 22. Monitoring syllable boundaries during speech production.
    Jansma BM; Schiller NO
    Brain Lang; 2004; 90(1-3):311-7. PubMed ID: 15172548
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Phonological Task Enhances the Frequency-Following Response to Deviant Task-Irrelevant Speech Sounds.
    Alho K; Żarnowiec K; Gorina-Careta N; Escera C
    Front Hum Neurosci; 2019; 13():245. PubMed ID: 31379540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. The effect of voice-onset-time on dichotic listening with consonant-vowel syllables.
    Rimol LM; Eichele T; Hugdahl K
    Neuropsychologia; 2006; 44(2):191-6. PubMed ID: 16023155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. P300-based Stroop study with low probability and target Stroop oddballs: the evidence still favors the response selection hypothesis.
    Rosenfeld JP; Skogsberg KR
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2006 Jun; 60(3):240-50. PubMed ID: 16102861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Word semantics is processed even without attentional effort.
    Relander K; Rämä P; Kujala T
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2009 Aug; 21(8):1511-22. PubMed ID: 18823236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Immediate memory in the orally trained deaf: effects of 'lipreadability' in the recall of written syllables.
    Campbell R; Wright H
    Br J Psychol; 1989 Aug; 80 ( Pt 3)():299-312. PubMed ID: 2790390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Read my lips: asymmetries in the visual expression and perception of speech revealed through the McGurk effect.
    Nicholls ME; Searle DA; Bradshaw JL
    Psychol Sci; 2004 Feb; 15(2):138-41. PubMed ID: 14738522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Attention effects on the processing of task-relevant and task-irrelevant speech sounds and letters.
    Mittag M; Inauri K; Huovilainen T; Leminen M; Salo E; Rinne T; Kujala T; Alho K
    Front Neurosci; 2013; 7():231. PubMed ID: 24348324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Perceiving speech from inverted faces.
    Massaro DW; Cohen MM
    Percept Psychophys; 1996 Oct; 58(7):1047-65. PubMed ID: 8920841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The functional unit in phonological encoding: evidence for moraic representation in native Japanese speakers.
    Kureta Y; Fushimi T; Tatsumi IF
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2006 Sep; 32(5):1102-19. PubMed ID: 16938049
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Visual attention in deaf and normal hearing adults: effects of stimulus compatibility.
    Sladen DP; Tharpe AM; Ashmead DH; Wesley Grantham D; Chun MM
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2005 Dec; 48(6):1529-37. PubMed ID: 16478388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Audiovisual deficits in older adults with hearing loss: biological evidence.
    Musacchia G; Arum L; Nicol T; Garstecki D; Kraus N
    Ear Hear; 2009 Oct; 30(5):505-14. PubMed ID: 19546807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. When is an odd number not odd? Influence of task rule on the MARC effect for numeric classification.
    Cho YS; Proctor RW
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2007 Sep; 33(5):832-42. PubMed ID: 17723063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Mixing compatible and incompatible mappings: elimination, reduction, and enhancement of spatial compatibility effects.
    Vu KP; Proctor RW
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2004 Apr; 57(3):539-56. PubMed ID: 15204140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Adaptation of neuromagnetic N1 responses to phonetic stimuli by visual speech in humans.
    Jääskeläinen IP; Ojanen V; Ahveninen J; Auranen T; Levänen S; Möttönen R; Tarnanen I; Sams M
    Neuroreport; 2004 Dec; 15(18):2741-4. PubMed ID: 15597045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Dissociation of processes underlying spatial s-r compatibility: evidence for the independent influence of what and where.
    Toth JP; Levine B; Stuss DT; Oh A; Winocur G; Meiran N
    Conscious Cogn; 1995 Dec; 4(4):483-501. PubMed ID: 8750420
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Stimulus-response compatibility with relevant and irrelevant stimulus dimensions that do and do not overlap with the response.
    Kornblum S; Lee JW
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1995 Aug; 21(4):855-75. PubMed ID: 7643052
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Compatibility effects in stopping and response initiation in a continuous tracking task.
    Morein-Zamir S; Nagelkerke P; Chua R; Franks I; Kingstone A
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2006 Dec; 59(12):2148-61. PubMed ID: 17095493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Does Perceptual Simulation Explain Spatial Effects in Word Categorization?
    Treccani B; Mulatti C; Sulpizio S; Job R
    Front Psychol; 2019; 10():1102. PubMed ID: 31156515
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.