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 *

231 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1594437)

  • 1. The word-superiority effect does not require a T-scope.
    Prinzmetal W
    Percept Psychophys; 1992 May; 51(5):473-84. PubMed ID: 1594437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The PIG in sPrInG: evidence on letter grouping from the reading of buried words.
    Humphreys GW; Mayall K; Cooper AC
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2003 Dec; 10(4):939-46. PubMed ID: 15000542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Identification of letters in the predesignated target paradigm: a word superiority effect for the common word the.
    Peterzell DH; Sinclair GP; Healy AF; Bourne LE
    Am J Psychol; 1990; 103(3):299-315. PubMed ID: 2221192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Perceiving exterior letters of words: differential influences of letter-fragment and non-letter-fragment masks.
    Jordon TR
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1995 Jun; 21(3):512-30. PubMed ID: 7790831
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The word-superiority effect and phonological recoding.
    Krueger LE
    Mem Cognit; 1992 Nov; 20(6):685-94. PubMed ID: 1435271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Judgments of duration, figure-ground contrast, and size for words and nonwords.
    Reber R; Zimmermann TD; Wurtz P
    Percept Psychophys; 2004 Oct; 66(7):1105-14. PubMed ID: 15751469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The word without the tachistoscope.
    Prinzmetal W; Silvers B
    Percept Psychophys; 1994 Mar; 55(3):296-312. PubMed ID: 8036111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Recognition of letters in words and nonwords.
    Allegretti CL; Puglisi JT
    J Gen Psychol; 1982 Jul; 107(1st Half):139-48. PubMed ID: 7119756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Detection of intraword and interword letter repetition: a test of the word unitization hypothesis.
    Krueger LE
    Mem Cognit; 1989 Jan; 17(1):48-57. PubMed ID: 2913456
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Temporal separation of two part-letter arrays and size changes in a nonmasking work-superiority effect.
    Solman RT
    Perception; 1987; 16(5):655-69. PubMed ID: 3451193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The role of spatial attention in visual word processing.
    McCann RS; Folk CL; Johnston JC
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1992 Nov; 18(4):1015-29. PubMed ID: 1431741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Lexical factors in the word-superiority effect.
    Hildebrandt N; Caplan D; Sokol S; Torreano L
    Mem Cognit; 1995 Jan; 23(1):23-33. PubMed ID: 7885263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Perceptual and response interactions in semantic priming.
    Bernstein IH; Bissonnette V; Welch KR
    Percept Psychophys; 1990 Dec; 48(6):525-34. PubMed ID: 2270184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Are whole words perceptual units in reading?
    Silverman WP; Ulatowski PE
    Percept Mot Skills; 1981 Dec; 53(3):811-26. PubMed ID: 7322780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A developmental, interactive activation model of the word superiority effect.
    Chase CH; Tallal P
    J Exp Child Psychol; 1990 Jun; 49(3):448-87. PubMed ID: 2348161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Letter detection with rapid serial visual presentation: evidence against word superiority at feature extraction.
    Krueger LE; Shapiro RG
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1979 Nov; 5(4):657-673. PubMed ID: 528966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Word superiority over isolated letters: the neglected case of forward masking.
    Jordan TR; Bevan KM
    Mem Cognit; 1994 Mar; 22(2):133-44. PubMed ID: 8035690
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Letter identification in words and non-words, with variation in visual angle and delay of position cue.
    Solman RT
    Perception; 1982; 11(3):305-17. PubMed ID: 7167339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. What do lateralized displays tell us about visual word perception? A cautionary indication from the word-letter effect.
    Jordan TR; Patching GR
    Neuropsychologia; 2004; 42(11):1504-14. PubMed ID: 15246288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Ease of identifying words degraded by visual noise.
    Barber P; de la Mahotière C
    Br J Psychol; 1982 Aug; 73 (Pt 3)():371-81. PubMed ID: 7116083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.