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 *

174 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12589445)

  • 1. Knowledge of word length does not constrain word identification.
    Inhoff AW; Eiter BM
    Psychol Res; 2003 Feb; 67(1):1-9. PubMed ID: 12589445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The effects of interletter spacing in visual-word recognition.
    Perea M; Moret-Tatay C; Gómez P
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2011 Jul; 137(3):345-51. PubMed ID: 21545978
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Parafoveal processing in word recognition.
    Kennedy A
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2000 May; 53(2):429-55. PubMed ID: 10881613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The processing of lexical stress during visual word recognition: typicality effects and orthographic correlates.
    Arciuli J; Cupples L
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2006 May; 59(5):920-48. PubMed ID: 16608755
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Visual word recognition during reading is followed by subvocal articulation.
    Eiter BM; Inhoff AW
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2010 Mar; 36(2):457-70. PubMed ID: 20192542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Endogenous versus exogenous attentional cuing effects on memory.
    Hauer BJ; MacLeod CM
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2006 Jul; 122(3):305-20. PubMed ID: 16458848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The orthographic uniqueness point and eye movements during reading.
    Miller B; Juhasz BJ; Rayner K
    Br J Psychol; 2006 May; 97(Pt 2):191-216. PubMed ID: 16613649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Transposed-letter effects in reading: evidence from eye movements and parafoveal preview.
    Johnson RL; Perea M; Rayner K
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2007 Feb; 33(1):209-29. PubMed ID: 17311489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Do readers obtain preview benefit from word N + 2? A test of serial attention shift versus distributed lexical processing models of eye movement control in reading.
    Rayner K; Juhasz BJ; Brown SJ
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2007 Feb; 33(1):230-45. PubMed ID: 17311490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Letter position information and printed word perception: the relative-position priming constraint.
    Grainger J; Granier JP; Farioli F; Van Assche E; van Heuven WJ
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2006 Aug; 32(4):865-84. PubMed ID: 16846285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Attentional cueing effect in the identification of words and pseudowords of different length.
    Auclair L; Siéroff E
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2002 Apr; 55(2):445-63. PubMed ID: 12047053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Re-evaluating split-fovea processing in word recognition: effects of word length.
    Jordan TR; Paterson KB; Stachurski M
    Cortex; 2009 Apr; 45(4):495-505. PubMed ID: 19231478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Sentence context modulates visual word recognition and translation in bilinguals.
    van Hell JG; de Groot AM
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2008 Jul; 128(3):431-51. PubMed ID: 18486085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Interactive activation in visual word recognition: constraints imposed by the joint effects of spatial attention and semantics.
    Stolz JA; Stevanovski B
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2004 Dec; 30(6):1064-76. PubMed ID: 15584815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Feedforward and feedback consistency effects for high- and low-frequency words in lexical decision and naming.
    Lacruz I; Folk J
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2004 Oct; 57(7):1261-84. PubMed ID: 15513246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Recognition units in reading: backward masking experiments.
    Allport A
    Spat Vis; 2009; 22(6):473-91. PubMed ID: 19891849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. How does interhemispheric communication in visual word recognition work? Deciding between early and late integration accounts of the split fovea theory.
    Van der Haegen L; Brysbaert M; Davis CJ
    Brain Lang; 2009 Feb; 108(2):112-21. PubMed ID: 18657313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Exterior letters are not privileged in the early stage of visual word recognition during reading: comment on Jordan, Thomas, Patching and Scott-Brown (2003).
    Inhoff AW; Radach R; Eiter BM; Skelly M
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2003 Sep; 29(5):894-9. PubMed ID: 14516222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The role of low-spatial frequencies in lexical decision and masked priming.
    Boden C; Giaschi D
    Brain Cogn; 2009 Apr; 69(3):580-91. PubMed ID: 19168272
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Evaluating a split fovea model of visual word recognition: effects of case alternation in the two visual fields and in the left and right halves of words presented at the fovea.
    Ellis AW; Brooks J; Lavidor M
    Neuropsychologia; 2005; 43(8):1128-37. PubMed ID: 15817170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.