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 *

149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16397813)

  • 21. Verbal representation in task order control: an examination with transition and task cues in random task switching.
    Saeki E; Saito S
    Mem Cognit; 2009 Oct; 37(7):1040-50. PubMed ID: 19744942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Priming cue encoding by manipulating transition frequency in explicitly cued task switching.
    Schneider DW; Logan GD
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2006 Feb; 13(1):145-51. PubMed ID: 16724782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The influence of cue-task association and location on switch cost and alternating-switch cost.
    Arbuthnott KD; Woodward TS
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2002 Mar; 56(1):18-29. PubMed ID: 11901958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Investigating a method for reducing residual switch costs in cued task switching.
    Schneider DW
    Mem Cognit; 2016 Jul; 44(5):762-77. PubMed ID: 26833200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Intentional preparation of auditory attention-switches: Explicit cueing and sequential switch-predictability.
    Seibold JC; Nolden S; Oberem J; Fels J; Koch I
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2018 Jun; 71(6):1382-1395. PubMed ID: 28631530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Evidence for a multicomponent hierarchical representation of dual tasks.
    Hirsch P; Roesch C; Koch I
    Mem Cognit; 2021 Feb; 49(2):350-363. PubMed ID: 32989661
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Inner speech as a retrieval aid for task goals: the effects of cue type and articulatory suppression in the random task cuing paradigm.
    Miyake A; Emerson MJ; Padilla F; Ahn JC
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2004; 115(2-3):123-42. PubMed ID: 14962397
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. ERPs dissociate the effects of switching task sets and task cues.
    Nicholson R; Karayanidis F; Bumak E; Poboka D; Michie PT
    Brain Res; 2006 Jun; 1095(1):107-23. PubMed ID: 16714004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Switching in the cocktail party: exploring intentional control of auditory selective attention.
    Koch I; Lawo V; Fels J; Vorländer M
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2011 Aug; 37(4):1140-7. PubMed ID: 21553997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Episodic and semantic components of the compound-stimulus strategy in the explicit task-cuing procedure.
    Arrington CM; Logan GD
    Mem Cognit; 2004 Sep; 32(6):965-78. PubMed ID: 15673184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Feature Integration and Task Switching: Diminished Switch Costs after Controlling for Stimulus, Response, and Cue Repetitions.
    Schmidt JR; Liefooghe B
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(3):e0151188. PubMed ID: 26964102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Differential effects of articulatory suppression on cue-switch and task-switch trials in random task cueing with 2:1 mapping.
    Saeki E; Saito S
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2012; 65(8):1599-614. PubMed ID: 22506894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Very clever homunculus: compound stimulus strategies for the explicit task-cuing procedure.
    Logan GD; Bundesen C
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2004 Oct; 11(5):832-40. PubMed ID: 15732691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Task switching with a 2:1 cue-to-task mapping: separating cue disambiguation from task-rule retrieval.
    Kleinsorge T
    Psychol Res; 2012 May; 76(3):329-35. PubMed ID: 21617987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Exploring temporal dissipation of attention settings in auditory task switching.
    Koch I; Lawo V
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2014 Jan; 76(1):73-80. PubMed ID: 24163154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Cue type affects preparatory influences on task inhibition.
    Gade M; Koch I
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2014 May; 148():12-8. PubMed ID: 24486802
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. The effects of foreknowledge and task-set shifting as mirrored in cue- and target-locked event-related potentials.
    Finke M; Escera C; Barceló F
    PLoS One; 2012; 7(11):e49486. PubMed ID: 23152912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Can the task-cuing paradigm measure an endogenous task-set reconfiguration process?
    Monsell S; Mizon GA
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2006 Jun; 32(3):493-516. PubMed ID: 16822121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Advance preparation in task switching: what work is being done?
    Altmann EM
    Psychol Sci; 2004 Sep; 15(9):616-22. PubMed ID: 15327633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The Instructed Task-Switch Evaluation Effect: Is the Instruction to Switch Tasks Sufficient to Dislike Task Switch Cues?
    Van Dessel P; Liefooghe B; De Houwer J
    J Cogn; 2020 Jan; 3(1):1. PubMed ID: 31934683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.