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 *

92 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15847230)

  • 41. Memory for actions: item and relational information in categorized lists.
    Engelkamp J; Seiler KH; Zimmer HD
    Psychol Res; 2004 Dec; 69(1-2):1-10. PubMed ID: 14691724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. [Deficits in memory retrieval: an argument in favor of frontal subcortical dysfunction in depression].
    Fossati P; Deweer B; Raoux N; Allilaire JF
    Encephale; 1995; 21(4):295-305. PubMed ID: 7588169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. ERP correlates of intentional forgetting.
    Mecklinger A; Parra M; Waldhauser GT
    Brain Res; 2009 Feb; 1255():132-47. PubMed ID: 19103178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. A global theory of remembering and forgetting from multiple lists.
    Lehman M; Malmberg KJ
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2009 Jul; 35(4):970-88. PubMed ID: 19586264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Age differences in hypermnesia: word gain versus word loss.
    Finkel D; Fox PW; McGue M
    Exp Aging Res; 1995; 21(1):33-46. PubMed ID: 7744169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Does testing impair relational processing? Failed attempts to replicate the negative testing effect.
    Rawson KA; Wissman KT; Vaughn KE
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2015 Sep; 41(5):1326-36. PubMed ID: 25961357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Dissociative effects of orthographic distinctiveness in pure and mixed lists: an item-order account.
    McDaniel MA; Cahill M; Bugg JM; Meadow NG
    Mem Cognit; 2011 Oct; 39(7):1162-73. PubMed ID: 21584853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. The origin of the interaction between learning method and delay in the testing effect: the roles of processing and conceptual retrieval organization.
    Congleton A; Rajaram S
    Mem Cognit; 2012 May; 40(4):528-39. PubMed ID: 22160872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. The relation of output order and commission errors in free recall and eyewitness accounts.
    Schwartz BL; Fisher RP; Hebert KS
    Memory; 1998 May; 6(3):257-75. PubMed ID: 9709442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. The category access measure of relational processing.
    Burns DJ; Brown CA
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2000 Jul; 26(4):1057-62. PubMed ID: 10946378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. The emergence of item-specific encoding effects in between-subjects designs: perceptual interference and multiple recall tests.
    Mulligan NW
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2002 Jun; 9(2):375-82. PubMed ID: 12120803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Memory in pregnancy and post-partum: Item specific and relational encoding processes in recall and recognition.
    Spataro P; Saraulli D; Oriolo D; Costanzi M; Zanetti H; Cestari V; Rossi-Arnaud C
    Scand J Psychol; 2016 Aug; 57(4):271-7. PubMed ID: 27197632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Generation and hypermnesia.
    Mulligan NW
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2001 Mar; 27(2):436-50. PubMed ID: 11294442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Why consumers misattribute sponsorships to non-sponsor brands: Differential roles of item and relational communications.
    Weeks CS; Humphreys MS; Cornwell TB
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2018 Jun; 24(2):125-144. PubMed ID: 29389163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Dynamic changes in hypermnesia across early and late tests: a relational/item-specific account.
    McDaniel MA; Moore BA; Whiteman HL
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 1998 Jan; 24(1):173-85. PubMed ID: 9438958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Fluctuations in recall across successive test trials.
    Nelson TO; Macleod CM
    Mem Cognit; 1974 Jul; 2(4):687-90. PubMed ID: 24203739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Establishing and explaining the testing effect in free recall for young children.
    Lipowski SL; Pyc MA; Dunlosky J; Rawson KA
    Dev Psychol; 2014 Apr; 50(4):994-1000. PubMed ID: 24294884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Relational and item-specific information as determinants of category superiority effects.
    Sharps MJ; Wilson-Leff CA; Price JL
    J Gen Psychol; 1995 Jul; 122(3):271-85. PubMed ID: 7650521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. The attentional boost effect enhances the item-specific, but not the relational, encoding of verbal material: Evidence from multiple recall tests with related and unrelated lists.
    Spataro P; Mulligan NW; Cestari V; Santirocchi A; Saraulli D; Rossi-Arnaud C
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2022 Aug; 48(8):1083-1097. PubMed ID: 33818117
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Free recall and organization as a function of varying relational encoding in action memory.
    Engelkamp J; Zimmer HD
    Psychol Res; 2002 May; 66(2):91-8. PubMed ID: 12132118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.