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 *

151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16255127)

  • 1. Practice effects, workload, and reaction time in deception.
    Vendemia JM; Buzan RF; Green EP
    Am J Psychol; 2005; 118(3):413-29. PubMed ID: 16255127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Reaction time of motor responses in two-stimulus paradigms involving deception and congruity with varying levels of difficulty.
    Vendemia JM; Buzan RF; Simon-Dack SL
    Behav Neurol; 2005; 16(1):25-36. PubMed ID: 16082077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Differential effects of practice on the executive processes used for truthful and deceptive responses: an event-related brain potential study.
    Johnson R; Barnhardt J; Zhu J
    Brain Res Cogn Brain Res; 2005 Aug; 24(3):386-404. PubMed ID: 16099352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The contribution of executive processes to deceptive responding.
    Johnson R; Barnhardt J; Zhu J
    Neuropsychologia; 2004; 42(7):878-901. PubMed ID: 14998703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Types of deception revealed by individual differences in cognitive abilities.
    Morgan CJ; LeSage JB; Kosslyn SM
    Soc Neurosci; 2009; 4(6):554-69. PubMed ID: 18654937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Differentiation of deception using pupillary responses as an index of cognitive processing.
    Dionisio DP; Granholm E; Hillix WA; Perrine WF
    Psychophysiology; 2001 Mar; 38(2):205-11. PubMed ID: 11347866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The self in conflict: the role of executive processes during truthful and deceptive responses about attitudes.
    Johnson R; Henkell H; Simon E; Zhu J
    Neuroimage; 2008 Jan; 39(1):469-82. PubMed ID: 17919934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Lie-specific involvement of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in deception.
    Priori A; Mameli F; Cogiamanian F; Marceglia S; Tiriticco M; Mrakic-Sposta S; Ferrucci R; Zago S; Polezzi D; Sartori G
    Cereb Cortex; 2008 Feb; 18(2):451-5. PubMed ID: 17584853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. An event-related potential study of deception to self preferences.
    Tu S; Li H; Jou J; Zhang Q; Wang T; Yu C; Qiu J
    Brain Res; 2009 Jan; 1247():142-8. PubMed ID: 18952072
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Are errors differentiable from deceptive responses when feigning memory impairment? An fMRI study.
    Lee TM; Au RK; Liu HL; Ting KH; Huang CM; Chan CC
    Brain Cogn; 2009 Mar; 69(2):406-12. PubMed ID: 18938008
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Does the truth interfere with our ability to deceive?
    Osman M; Channon S; Fitzpatrick S
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2009 Oct; 16(5):901-6. PubMed ID: 19815796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A truth that's told with bad intent: an ERP study of deception.
    Carrión RE; Keenan JP; Sebanz N
    Cognition; 2010 Jan; 114(1):105-10. PubMed ID: 19836013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Separating deceptive and orienting components in a Concealed Information Test.
    Ambach W; Stark R; Peper M; Vaitl D
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2008 Nov; 70(2):95-104. PubMed ID: 18674573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The evolution and psychology of self-deception.
    von Hippel W; Trivers R
    Behav Brain Sci; 2011 Feb; 34(1):1-16; discussion 16-56. PubMed ID: 21288379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Emotion processing effects on interference resolution in working memory.
    Levens SM; Phelps EA
    Emotion; 2008 Apr; 8(2):267-80. PubMed ID: 18410200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Single-trial discrimination of truthful from deceptive responses during a game of financial risk using alpha-band MEG signals.
    Seth AK; Iversen JR; Edelman GM
    Neuroimage; 2006 Aug; 32(1):465-76. PubMed ID: 16678444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Evidence of mnemonic ability selectively affecting truthful and deceptive response dynamics.
    Farrow TF; Hopwood MC; Parks RW; Hunter MD; Spence SA
    Am J Psychol; 2010; 123(4):447-53. PubMed ID: 21291161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. An object cue is more effective than a word in ERP-based detection of deception.
    Cutmore TR; Djakovic T; Kebbell MR; Shum DH
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2009 Mar; 71(3):185-92. PubMed ID: 18789361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Efficacy of forensic statement analysis in distinguishing truthful from deceptive eyewitness accounts of highly stressful events.
    Morgan CA; Colwell K; Hazlett GA
    J Forensic Sci; 2011 Sep; 56(5):1227-34. PubMed ID: 21854383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Both High Cognitive Load and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Over the Right Inferior Frontal Cortex Make Truth and Lie Responses More Similar.
    Sánchez N; Masip J; Gómez-Ariza CJ
    Front Psychol; 2020; 11():776. PubMed ID: 32508700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.