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 *

111 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16194945)

  • 1. Judgement of two causal candidates from contingency information: II. Effects of information about one cause on judgements of the other cause.
    White PA
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2005 Aug; 58(6):999-1021. PubMed ID: 16194945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Judgement of two causal candidates from contingency information: effects of relative prevalence of the two causes.
    White P
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2004 Aug; 57(6):961-91. PubMed ID: 15370512
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Causal judgement from contingency information: judging interactions between two causal candidates.
    White PA
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2002 Jul; 55(3):819-38. PubMed ID: 12188515
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Accounting for occurrences: a new view of the use of contingency information in causal judgment.
    White PA
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2008 Jan; 34(1):204-18. PubMed ID: 18194063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Normative and descriptive accounts of the influence of power and contingency on causal judgement.
    Perales JC; Shanks DR
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2003 Aug; 56(6):977-1007. PubMed ID: 12881167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Perceiving a strong causal relation in a weak contingency: further investigation of the evidential evaluation model of causal judgement.
    White PA
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2002 Jan; 55(1):97-114. PubMed ID: 11873858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Cue interaction effects in causal judgement: an interpretation in terms of the evidential evaluation model.
    White PA
    Q J Exp Psychol B; 2005 Apr; 58(2):99-140. PubMed ID: 16095042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Causal judgment as evaluation of evidence: the use of confirmation and disconfirmatory information.
    White PA
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2003 Apr; 56(3):491-513. PubMed ID: 12814099
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Weighting of contingency information in causal judgement: evidence of hypothesis dependence and use of a positive-test strategy.
    Mandel DR; Vartanian O
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2009 Dec; 62(12):2388-408. PubMed ID: 19391044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The relative effect of cue interaction.
    Tangen JM; Allan LG
    Q J Exp Psychol B; 2003 Aug; 56(3):279-300. PubMed ID: 12881163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Contiguity and the outcome density bias in action-outcome contingency judgements.
    Vallée-Tourangeau F; Murphy RA; Baker AG
    Q J Exp Psychol B; 2005 Apr; 58(2):177-92. PubMed ID: 16095045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Competition between multiple causes of a single outcome in causal reasoning.
    Darredeau C; Baetu I; Baker AG; Murphy RA
    J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process; 2009 Jan; 35(1):1-14. PubMed ID: 19159158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Statistical contingency has a different impact on preparation judgements than on causal judgements.
    De Houwer J; Vandorpe S; Beckers T
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2007 Mar; 60(3):418-32. PubMed ID: 17366309
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Predictions and causal estimations are not supported by the same associative structure.
    Vadillo MA; Matute H
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2007 Mar; 60(3):433-47. PubMed ID: 17366310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Causal judgement from information about outcome magnitude.
    White PA
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2013; 66(11):2268-88. PubMed ID: 23573791
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Backward blocking and recovery from overshadowing in human causal judgement: the role of within-compound associations.
    Wasserman EA; Berglan LR
    Q J Exp Psychol B; 1998 May; 51(2):121-38. PubMed ID: 9621838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Inferences about unobserved causes in human contingency learning.
    Hagmayer Y; Waldmann MR
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2007 Mar; 60(3):330-55. PubMed ID: 17366304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Depressive realism and the effect of intertrial interval on judgements of zero, positive, and negative contingencies.
    Msetfi RM; Murphy RA; Simpson J
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2007 Mar; 60(3):461-81. PubMed ID: 17366312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Outcome additivity, elemental processing and blocking in human causality judgements.
    Livesey EJ; Boakes RA
    Q J Exp Psychol B; 2004 Oct; 57(4):361-79. PubMed ID: 15513261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Accounting for occurrences: an explanation for some novel tendencies in causal judgment from contingency information.
    White PA
    Mem Cognit; 2009 Jun; 37(4):500-13. PubMed ID: 19460956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.