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 *

87 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14578085)

  • 1. The irrelevant sound effect: what needs modelling, and a tentative model.
    Page MP; Norris DG
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2003 Nov; 56(8):1289-300; discussion 1301-6. PubMed ID: 14578085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Irrelevant sound disrupts order information in free recall as in serial recall.
    Beaman CP; Jones DM
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 1998 Aug; 51(3):615-36. PubMed ID: 9745380
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The irrelevant sound effect under articulatory suppression: is it a suffix effect?
    Hanley JR; Hayes A
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2012 Mar; 38(2):482-7. PubMed ID: 21928934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Interference by process, not content, determines semantic auditory distraction.
    Marsh JE; Hughes RW; Jones DM
    Cognition; 2009 Jan; 110(1):23-38. PubMed ID: 19081558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Retroactive effects of irrelevant speech on serial recall from short-term memory.
    Norris D; Baddeley AD; Page MP
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2004 Sep; 30(5):1093-105. PubMed ID: 15355138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The impact of order incongruence between a task-irrelevant auditory sequence and a task-relevant visual sequence.
    Hughes RW; Jones DM
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2005 Apr; 31(2):316-27. PubMed ID: 15826233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Examining the relationship between free recall and immediate serial recall: the effect of concurrent task performance.
    Bhatarah P; Ward G; Tan L
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2006 Mar; 32(2):215-29. PubMed ID: 16569142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The irrelevant sound phenomenon revisited: what role for working memory capacity?
    Beaman CP
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2004 Sep; 30(5):1106-18. PubMed ID: 15355139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The effects of irrelevant speech and articulatory suppression on the serial recall of silently presented lipread digits.
    Divin W; Coyle K; James DT
    Br J Psychol; 2001 Nov; 92(Pt 4):593-616. PubMed ID: 11762863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Forgetting in immediate serial recall: decay, temporal distinctiveness, or interference?
    Oberauer K; Lewandowsky S
    Psychol Rev; 2008 Jul; 115(3):544-76. PubMed ID: 18729591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Synchronized brain activity during rehearsal and short-term memory disruption by irrelevant speech is affected by recall mode.
    Kopp F; Schröger E; Lipka S
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2006 Aug; 61(2):188-203. PubMed ID: 16298003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Interactions between auditory 'what' and 'where' pathways revealed by enhanced near-threshold discrimination of frequency and position.
    Tardif E; Spierer L; Clarke S; Murray MM
    Neuropsychologia; 2008 Mar; 46(4):958-66. PubMed ID: 18191423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Detrimental effects of irrelevant speech on serial recall of visual items are reflected in reduced visual N1 and reduced theta activity.
    Weisz N; Schlittmeier SJ
    Cereb Cortex; 2006 Aug; 16(8):1097-105. PubMed ID: 16221927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Auditory location in the irrelevant sound effect: The effects of presenting auditory stimuli to either the left ear, right ear or both ears.
    Hadlington L; Bridges AM; Darby RJ
    Brain Cogn; 2004 Aug; 55(3):545-57. PubMed ID: 15223201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Interference in memory by process or content? A reply to Neath (2000).
    Jones DM; Tremblay S
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2000 Sep; 7(3):550-8. PubMed ID: 11082864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Silent reading rate and memory span.
    Poirier M; Schweickert R; Oliver J
    Memory; 2005; 13(3-4):380-7. PubMed ID: 15948624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Directly assessing the relationship between irrelevant speech and irrelevant tapping.
    Surprenant AM; Neath I; Bireta TJ; Allbritton DW
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2008 Sep; 62(3):141-9. PubMed ID: 18778142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.