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.
43. Qualitative differences in the representation of spatial relations for different object classes. Cooper EE; Brooks BE J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2004 Apr; 30(2):243-56. PubMed ID: 15053686 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Evidence of right cerebral hemisphere dysfunction in schizophrenic patients with left hemisphere overactivation. Schweitzer L Biol Psychiatry; 1982 Jun; 17(6):655-73. PubMed ID: 7104418 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. [EEG study of the functional organization of the right and left hemisphere during solution of verbal and spatial problems]. Goman RI; Machinskiĭ NO Zh Vyssh Nerv Deiat Im I P Pavlova; 1984; 34(3):412-20. PubMed ID: 6475290 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. ERP evidence for the split fovea theory. Martin CD; Thierry G; Démonet JF; Roberts M; Nazir T Brain Res; 2007 Dec; 1185():212-20. PubMed ID: 17956755 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Priming vs. rhyming: orthographic and phonological representations in the left and right hemispheres. Lindell AK; Lum JA Brain Cogn; 2008 Nov; 68(2):193-203. PubMed ID: 18556102 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Rigid and nonrigid objects in canonical and noncanonical views: hemisphere-specific effects on object identification. Laeng B; Carlesimo GA; Caltagirone C; Miceli G Cogn Neuropsychol; 2002 Dec; 19(8):697-720. PubMed ID: 20957560 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Categorical and coordinate processing in object recognition depends on different spatial frequencies. Saneyoshi A; Michimata C Cogn Process; 2015 Feb; 16(1):27-33. PubMed ID: 25236965 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Asymmetric coding of categorical spatial relations in both language and vision. Roth JC; Franconeri SL Front Psychol; 2012; 3():464. PubMed ID: 23181036 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Brief, prior, exposure to red decreases categorical and coordinate spatial task performance. Lall S; Brunye TT; Barua M; Propper RE Brain Cogn; 2020 Jul; 142():105571. PubMed ID: 32408058 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. The nature of categorical and coordinate spatial relation processing: An interference study. van der Ham IJ; Borst G J Cogn Psychol (Hove); 2011; 23(8):922-930. PubMed ID: 22905316 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Functional Relations Modulate the Responsiveness to Affordances Despite the Impact of Conflicting Stimulus-Response Mappings. Vastano R; Finn M; Barnes-Holmes D Front Psychol; 2017; 8():1951. PubMed ID: 29163319 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Getting it right: a reply to baum. Moore J Behav Anal; 2010; 33(2):237-8. PubMed ID: 22532720 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Spatial relations and object processes in two cerebral hemispheres: a validation of a sequential matching paradigm for the study of laterality. Kogure T Laterality; 2001 Jan; 6(1):57-68. PubMed ID: 15513159 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. A possible connection between categorical and coordinate spatial relation representations. Niebauer CL Brain Cogn; 2001 Dec; 47(3):434-45. PubMed ID: 11748899 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. The time course of hemispheric differences in categorical and coordinate spatial processing. van der Ham IJ; van Wezel RJ; Oleksiak A; Postma A Neuropsychologia; 2007 Jun; 45(11):2492-8. PubMed ID: 17499820 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]