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.
139 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15134764)
1. Implicit preferences: the role(s) of familiarity in the structural mere exposure effect. Zizak DM; Reber AS Conscious Cogn; 2004 Jun; 13(2):336-62. PubMed ID: 15134764 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The relationship between the structural mere exposure effect and the implicit learning process. Newell BR; Bright JE Q J Exp Psychol A; 2001 Nov; 54(4):1087-104. PubMed ID: 11765734 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Prior familiarity with components enhances unconscious learning of relations. Scott RB; Dienes Z Conscious Cogn; 2010 Mar; 19(1):413-8. PubMed ID: 20096605 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Intentional control based on familiarity in artificial grammar learning. Wan L; Dienes Z; Fu X Conscious Cogn; 2008 Dec; 17(4):1209-18. PubMed ID: 18667335 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Visual novel stimuli in an ERP novelty oddball paradigm: effects of familiarity on repetition and recognition memory. Cycowicz YM; Friedman D Psychophysiology; 2007 Jan; 44(1):11-29. PubMed ID: 17241137 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Implicit learning and dyslexia. Folia V; Uddén J; Forkstam C; Ingvar M; Hagoort P; Petersson KM Ann N Y Acad Sci; 2008 Dec; 1145():132-50. PubMed ID: 19076394 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Recollection, fluency, and the explicit/implicit distinction in artificial grammar learning. Kinder A; Shanks DR; Cock J; Tunney RJ J Exp Psychol Gen; 2003 Dec; 132(4):551-65. PubMed ID: 14640848 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The subliminal mere exposure effect does not generalize to structurally related stimuli. Newell BR; Bright JE Can J Exp Psychol; 2003 Mar; 57(1):61-8. PubMed ID: 12674370 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Experimental dissociations between memory measures: influence of retrieval strategies. Willems S; Van der Linden M Conscious Cogn; 2009 Mar; 18(1):39-55. PubMed ID: 19010060 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The mere exposure effect is differentially sensitive to different judgment tasks. Seamon JG; McKenna PA; Binder N Conscious Cogn; 1998 Mar; 7(1):85-102. PubMed ID: 9521834 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effects of retention intervals on receiver operating characteristics in artificial grammar learning. Tunney RJ; Bezzina G Acta Psychol (Amst); 2007 May; 125(1):37-50. PubMed ID: 16899208 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Mere exposure effect: A consequence of direct and indirect fluency-preference links. Willems S; Van der Linden M Conscious Cogn; 2006 Jun; 15(2):323-41. PubMed ID: 16182567 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Can patients with Alzheimer's disease learn a category implicitly? Bozoki A; Grossman M; Smith EE Neuropsychologia; 2006; 44(5):816-27. PubMed ID: 16229868 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Clarification of the memory artefact in the assessment of suggestibility. Willner P J Intellect Disabil Res; 2008 Apr; 52(Pt 4):318-26. PubMed ID: 18339094 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The effects of inversion and eye displacements of familiar and unknown faces on early and late-stage ERPs. Caharel S; Fiori N; Bernard C; Lalonde R; Rebaï M Int J Psychophysiol; 2006 Oct; 62(1):141-51. PubMed ID: 16678927 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Abstractionist and processing accounts of implicit learning. Johnstone T; Shanks DR Cogn Psychol; 2001 Feb; 42(1):61-112. PubMed ID: 11161417 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Exploring the recognition memory deficit in Parkinson's disease: estimates of recollection versus familiarity. Davidson PS; Anaki D; Saint-Cyr JA; Chow TW; Moscovitch M Brain; 2006 Jul; 129(Pt 7):1768-79. PubMed ID: 16714314 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]