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 *

129 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15709859)

  • 1. Stroop dilution revisited: evidence for domain-specific, limited-capacity processing.
    Roberts MA; Besner D
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2005 Feb; 31(1):3-13. PubMed ID: 15709859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Influence of color word availability on the Stroop color-naming effect.
    Kim H; Cho YS; Yamaguchi M; Proctor RW
    Percept Psychophys; 2008 Nov; 70(8):1540-51. PubMed ID: 19064496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Stroop dilution depends on the nature of the color carrier but not on its location.
    Cho YS; Lien MC; Proctor RW
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2006 Aug; 32(4):826-39. PubMed ID: 16846282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Automaticity in reading and the Stroop task: testing the limits of involuntary word processing.
    Brown TL; Joneleit K; Robinson CS; Brown CR
    Am J Psychol; 2002; 115(4):515-43. PubMed ID: 12516527
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Stroop dilution but not word-processing dilution: evidence for attention capture.
    Mitterer H; La Heij W; Van der Heijden AH
    Psychol Res; 2003 Feb; 67(1):30-42. PubMed ID: 12589448
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Attentional selection and word processing in Stroop and word search tasks: the role of selection for action.
    Brown TL
    Am J Psychol; 1996; 109(2):265-86. PubMed ID: 8644887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Response selection in visual search: the influence of response compatibility of nontargets.
    Starreveld PA; Theeuwes J; Mortier K
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2004 Feb; 30(1):56-78. PubMed ID: 14769068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Reverse stroop effects with untranslated responses.
    Blais C; Besner D
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2006 Dec; 32(6):1345-53. PubMed ID: 17154776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The effects of procedural variations on lateralized Stroop effects.
    Weekes NY; Zaidel E
    Brain Cogn; 1996 Aug; 31(3):308-30. PubMed ID: 8812012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Look here but ignore what you see: effects of distractors at fixation.
    Beck DM; Lavie N
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2005 Jun; 31(3):592-607. PubMed ID: 15982133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Visual half-field Stroop effects with spatial separation of words and color targets.
    Brown TL; Gore CL; Pearson T
    Brain Lang; 1998 Jun; 63(1):122-42. PubMed ID: 9642024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Eye movements and word skipping during reading revisited.
    Drieghe D; Rayner K; Pollatsek A
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2005 Oct; 31(5):954-9. PubMed ID: 16262491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Differential processing of word and color in unilateral spatial neglect.
    Morein-Zamir S; Henik A; Balas M; Soroker N
    Brain Res Cogn Brain Res; 2005 May; 23(2-3):259-69. PubMed ID: 15820633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Recognition intent and visual word recognition.
    Wang MY; Ching CL
    Conscious Cogn; 2009 Mar; 18(1):65-77. PubMed ID: 19036609
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Right visual field advantage in parafoveal processing: evidence from eye-fixation-related potentials.
    Simola J; Holmqvist K; Lindgren M
    Brain Lang; 2009 Nov; 111(2):101-13. PubMed ID: 19782390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Modularity beyond perception: evidence from single task interference paradigms.
    Magen H; Cohen A
    Cogn Psychol; 2007 Aug; 55(1):1-36. PubMed ID: 17083928
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. When does visual attention select all features of a distractor?
    Chen Z; Cave KR
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2006 Dec; 32(6):1452-64. PubMed ID: 17154784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A sensory origin for color-word stroop effects in aging: simulating age-related changes in color-vision mimics age-related changes in Stroop.
    Ben-David BM; Schneider BA
    Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn; 2010 Nov; 17(6):730-46. PubMed ID: 21058053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Visual attention and word recognition in stroop color naming: is word recognition "automatic"?
    Brown TL; Gore CL; Carr TH
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2002 Jun; 131(2):220-40. PubMed ID: 12049241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. An optimal viewing position effect in the Stroop task when only one letter is the color carrier.
    Parris BA; Sharma D; Weekes B
    Exp Psychol; 2007; 54(4):273-80. PubMed ID: 17953147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.