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 *

206 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12747505)

  • 61. A pattern recognition account of decision making.
    Massaro DW
    Mem Cognit; 1994 Sep; 22(5):616-27. PubMed ID: 7968557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 62. Conformity to peer pressure in preschool children.
    Haun DB; Tomasello M
    Child Dev; 2011; 82(6):1759-67. PubMed ID: 22023172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 63. Interpreting the effects of response bias on remember-know judgments using signal detection and threshold models.
    Rotello CM; Macmillan NA; Hicks JL; Hautus MJ
    Mem Cognit; 2006 Dec; 34(8):1598-614. PubMed ID: 17489287
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 64. Metacognition in psychophysical judgment: an unfolding view of comparative judgments of mental workload.
    Petrusic WM; Cloutier P
    Percept Psychophys; 1992 May; 51(5):485-99. PubMed ID: 1594438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 65. Syllogistic reasoning time: disconfirmation disconfirmed.
    Thompson VA; Striemer CL; Reikoff R; Gunter RW; Campbell JI
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2003 Mar; 10(1):184-9. PubMed ID: 12747506
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 66. Modeling clinical judgment and implicit guideline compliance in the diagnosis of melanomas using machine learning.
    Sboner A; Aliferis CF
    AMIA Annu Symp Proc; 2005; 2005():664-8. PubMed ID: 16779123
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 67. Demands on attention and the role of response priming in visual discrimination of feature conjunctions.
    Fournier LR; Herbert RJ; Farris C
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2004 Oct; 30(5):836-52. PubMed ID: 15462624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 68. Holistic processing of faces: perceptual and decisional components.
    Richler JJ; Gauthier I; Wenger MJ; Palmeri TJ
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2008 Mar; 34(2):328-42. PubMed ID: 18315409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 69. Cue-interaction effects in contingency judgments using the streamed-trial procedure.
    Hannah SD; Crump MJ; Allan LG; Siegel S
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2009 Jun; 63(2):103-12. PubMed ID: 19485601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 70. Blind insight: metacognitive discrimination despite chance task performance.
    Scott RB; Dienes Z; Barrett AB; Bor D; Seth AK
    Psychol Sci; 2014 Dec; 25(12):2199-208. PubMed ID: 25384551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 71. The architecture of intuition: Fluency and affect determine intuitive judgments of semantic and visual coherence and judgments of grammaticality in artificial grammar learning.
    Topolinski S; Strack F
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2009 Feb; 138(1):39-63. PubMed ID: 19203169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 72. Decision-tree models of categorization response times, choice proportions, and typicality judgments.
    Lafond D; Lacouture Y; Cohen AL
    Psychol Rev; 2009 Oct; 116(4):833-55. PubMed ID: 19839685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 73. Modeling aging effects on two-choice tasks: response signal and response time data.
    Ratcliff R
    Psychol Aging; 2008 Dec; 23(4):900-16. PubMed ID: 19140659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 74. Different developmental patterns of simple deductive and probabilistic inferential reasoning.
    Markovits H; Thompson V
    Mem Cognit; 2008 Sep; 36(6):1066-78. PubMed ID: 18927025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 75. Preserving informational separability and violating decisional separability in facial perception and recognition.
    Wenger MJ; Ingvalson EM
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2003 Nov; 29(6):1106-18. PubMed ID: 14622050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 76. The cognitive substrate of subjective probability.
    Nilsson H; Olsson H; Juslin P
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2005 Jul; 31(4):600-20. PubMed ID: 16060768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 77. Picture-digit differences in processing clock times.
    Goolkasian P
    Am J Psychol; 1984; 97(2):259-83. PubMed ID: 6731654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 78. Fast and confident: postdicting eyewitness identification accuracy in a field study.
    Sauerland M; Sporer SL
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2009 Mar; 15(1):46-62. PubMed ID: 19309216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 79. Judging the difficulty of perceptual decisions.
    Löffler A; Zylberberg A; Shadlen MN; Wolpert DM
    Elife; 2023 Nov; 12():. PubMed ID: 37975792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 80. Evidence for implicit scaling in comparative judgment.
    Sailor KM; Pineda KM
    Mem Cognit; 1993 Jul; 21(4):431-9. PubMed ID: 8350734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.