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 *

187 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17154784)

  • 21. Capturing attention when attention blinks.
    Wee S; Chua FK; Chua FK
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2004 Jun; 30(3):598-612. PubMed ID: 15161389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Can intertrial effects of features and dimensions be explained by a single theory?
    Becker SI
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2008 Dec; 34(6):1417-40. PubMed ID: 19045983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Emotional devaluation of distracting patterns and faces: a consequence of attentional inhibition during visual search?
    Raymond JE; Fenske MJ; Westoby N
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2005 Dec; 31(6):1404-15. PubMed ID: 16366798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Electrophysiological indices of target and distractor processing in visual search.
    Hickey C; Di Lollo V; McDonald JJ
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2009 Apr; 21(4):760-75. PubMed ID: 18564048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Expectancies modulate attentional capture by salient color singletons.
    Geyer T; Müller HJ; Krummenacher J
    Vision Res; 2008 May; 48(11):1315-26. PubMed ID: 18407311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. An inter-item similarity model unifying feature and conjunction search.
    Phillips S; Takeda Y; Kumada T
    Vision Res; 2006 Oct; 46(22):3867-80. PubMed ID: 16920177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Not all features are created equal: Processing asymmetries between location and object features.
    Chen Z
    Vision Res; 2009 May; 49(11):1481-91. PubMed ID: 19303423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Faces, flowers and football boots: capacity limits in distractor processing.
    Brebner JL; Macrae CN
    Cognition; 2008 May; 107(2):718-28. PubMed ID: 17927972
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. The effect of nonmasking distractors on the priming of motor responses.
    Jaskowski P
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2007 Apr; 33(2):456-68. PubMed ID: 17469979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Stroop dilution revisited: evidence for domain-specific, limited-capacity processing.
    Roberts MA; Besner D
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2005 Feb; 31(1):3-13. PubMed ID: 15709859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Selecting and ignoring salient objects within and across dimensions in visual search.
    Schubö A; Müller HJ
    Brain Res; 2009 Aug; 1283():84-101. PubMed ID: 19501066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Dopamine receptor (DRD2) genotype-dependent effects of nicotine on attention and distraction during rapid visual information processing.
    Gilbert DG; Izetelny A; Radtke R; Hammersley J; Rabinovich NE; Jameson TR; Huggenvik JI
    Nicotine Tob Res; 2005 Jun; 7(3):361-79. PubMed ID: 16085504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Objects and events as determinants of parallel processing in dual tasks: evidence from the backward compatibility effect.
    Ellenbogen R; Meiran N
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2011 Feb; 37(1):152-67. PubMed ID: 20718573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The interaction between stop signal inhibition and distractor interference in the flanker and Stroop task.
    Verbruggen F; Liefooghe B; Vandierendonck A
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2004 May; 116(1):21-37. PubMed ID: 15111228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. An electrophysiological assessment of distractor suppression in visual search tasks.
    Mazza V; Turatto M; Caramazza A
    Psychophysiology; 2009 Jul; 46(4):771-5. PubMed ID: 19490518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. The influence of "blind" distractors on eye movement trajectories in visual hemifield defects.
    Van der Stigchel S; van Zoest W; Theeuwes J; Barton JJ
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2008 Nov; 20(11):2025-36. PubMed ID: 18416675
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Specifying the distractor inhibition account of attention-induced motion blindness.
    Hesselmann G; Niedeggen M; Sahraie A; Milders M
    Vision Res; 2006 Mar; 46(6-7):1048-56. PubMed ID: 16309728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Bottom-up guidance in visual search for conjunctions.
    Proulx MJ
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2007 Feb; 33(1):48-56. PubMed ID: 17311478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Early and late modulation of saccade deviations by target distractor similarity.
    Mulckhuyse M; Van der Stigchel S; Theeuwes J
    J Neurophysiol; 2009 Sep; 102(3):1451-8. PubMed ID: 19553494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Where have we gone wrong? Perceptual load does not affect selective attention.
    Benoni H; Tsal Y
    Vision Res; 2010 Jun; 50(13):1292-8. PubMed ID: 20430048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.