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 *

110 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15355137)

  • 1. The importance of being nonalignable: a critical test of the structural alignment theory of similarity.
    Estes Z; Hasson U
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2004 Sep; 30(5):1082-92. PubMed ID: 15355137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Alignable and nonalignable differences in causal explanations.
    McGill AL
    Mem Cognit; 2002 Apr; 30(3):456-68. PubMed ID: 12061766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Choice-Process Satisfaction: The Influence of Attribute Alignability and Option Limitation.
    Zhang S; Fitzsimons GJ
    Organ Behav Hum Decis Process; 1999 Mar; 77(3):192-214. PubMed ID: 10080913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Commonalities and differences in similarity comparisons.
    Markman AB; Gentner D
    Mem Cognit; 1996 Mar; 24(2):235-49. PubMed ID: 8881326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. On the necessity of alignment: reply to Costello and Keane (2001).
    Wisniewski EJ
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2001 Jan; 27(1):272-7. PubMed ID: 11204102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Testing two theories of conceptual combination: alignment versus diagnosticity in the comprehension and production of combined concepts.
    Costello FJ; Keane MT
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2001 Jan; 27(1):255-71. PubMed ID: 11204101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Transformation and alignment in similarity.
    Hodgetts CJ; Hahn U; Chater N
    Cognition; 2009 Oct; 113(1):62-79. PubMed ID: 19720370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The Effect of Attribute Alignability on Product Purchase: The Moderating Role of Product Familiarity and Self-Construal.
    Zhang Y; Wen Y; Hou M
    Front Psychol; 2021; 12():636922. PubMed ID: 33868107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Two faces of (dis)similarity in affective judgments of persons: contrast or assimilation effects revealed by morphs.
    Ruys KI; Spears R; Gordijn EH; de Vries NK
    J Pers Soc Psychol; 2006 Mar; 90(3):399-411. PubMed ID: 16594827
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Judgments of similarity are psychological: the importance of importance.
    Zuriff GE
    Am Psychol; 2006 Sep; 61(6):641; discussion 641-2. PubMed ID: 16953760
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Contextual influences on liking and preference.
    Zellner DA
    Appetite; 2007 Nov; 49(3):679-82. PubMed ID: 17624625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. What makes a man similar to a tie? Stimulus compatibility with comparison and integration.
    Wisniewski EJ; Bassok M
    Cogn Psychol; 1999; 39(3-4):208-38. PubMed ID: 10631012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The effect of comparative context upon stereotype content: children's judgments of ingroup behavior.
    Bennett M; Sani F
    Scand J Psychol; 2008 Apr; 49(2):141-6. PubMed ID: 18352983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparison of two theories of "ratio" and "difference" judgments.
    Birnbaum MH
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 1980 Sep; 109(3):304-19. PubMed ID: 6447191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Individual differences in the perception of similarity and difference.
    Simmons S; Estes Z
    Cognition; 2008 Sep; 108(3):781-95. PubMed ID: 18721916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Alignment effects on learning multiple, use-relevant classification systems.
    Sifonis CM; Ross BH
    Mem Cognit; 2002 Oct; 30(7):1148-59. PubMed ID: 12507379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Focus theory of normative conduct and terror-management theory: the interactive impact of mortality salience and norm salience on social judgment.
    Jonas E; Martens A; Kayser DN; Fritsche I; Sullivan D; Greenberg J
    J Pers Soc Psychol; 2008 Dec; 95(6):1239-51. PubMed ID: 19025281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Reinstating the original principles of Proctor's unified theory for matching-task phenomena: an evaluation of Krueger and Shapiro's reformulation.
    Proctor RW; Rao KV
    Psychol Rev; 1983 Jan; 90(1):21-37. PubMed ID: 6844477
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Typical versus atypical unpacking and superadditive probability judgment.
    Sloman S; Rottenstreich Y; Wisniewski E; Hadjichristidis C; Fox CR
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2004 May; 30(3):573-82. PubMed ID: 15099126
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The influence of improper sets of information on judgment: how irrelevant information can bias judged probability.
    Dougherty MR; Sprenger A
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2006 May; 135(2):262-81. PubMed ID: 16719653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.