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 *

139 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17319051)

  • 1. The relative importance of external and internal features of facial composites.
    Frowd C; Bruce V; McIntyre A; Hancock P
    Br J Psychol; 2007 Feb; 98(Pt 1):61-77. PubMed ID: 17319051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Recovering faces from memory: the distracting influence of external facial features.
    Frowd CD; Skelton F; Atherton C; Pitchford M; Hepton G; Holden L; McIntyre AH; Hancock PJ
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2012 Jun; 18(2):224-38. PubMed ID: 22545929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Familiarity effects in the construction of facial-composite images using modern software systems.
    Frowd CD; Skelton FC; Butt N; Hassan A; Fields S; Hancock PJ
    Ergonomics; 2011 Dec; 54(12):1147-58. PubMed ID: 22103723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The impact of external facial features on the construction of facial composites.
    Brown C; Portch E; Skelton FC; Fodarella C; Kuivaniemi-Smith H; Herold K; Hancock PJB; Frowd CD
    Ergonomics; 2019 Apr; 62(4):575-592. PubMed ID: 30523739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Matching identities of familiar and unfamiliar faces caught on CCTV images.
    Bruce V; Henderson Z; Newman C; Burton AM
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2001 Sep; 7(3):207-18. PubMed ID: 11676099
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Configurational information in face perception.
    Young AW; Hellawell D; Hay DC
    Perception; 1987; 16(6):747-59. PubMed ID: 3454432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Identification of familiar and unfamiliar faces from internal and external features: some implications for theories of face recognition.
    Ellis HD; Shepherd JW; Davies GM
    Perception; 1979; 8(4):431-9. PubMed ID: 503774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. An adaptation study of internal and external features in facial representations.
    Hills C; Romano K; Davies-Thompson J; Barton JJ
    Vision Res; 2014 Jul; 100():18-28. PubMed ID: 24747020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Matching familiar and unfamiliar faces on internal and external features.
    Young AW; Hay DC; McWeeny KH; Flude BM; Ellis AW
    Perception; 1985; 14(6):737-46. PubMed ID: 3837875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Improving the quality of facial composites using a holistic cognitive interview.
    Frowd CD; Bruce V; Smith AJ; Hancock PJ
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2008 Sep; 14(3):276-87. PubMed ID: 18808281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Memory conjunction errors for realistic faces are consistent with configural processing.
    McKone E; Peh YX
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2006 Feb; 13(1):106-11. PubMed ID: 16724776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Recognition of parts of famous-face photographs by children: an experimental note.
    Campbell R; Tuck M
    Perception; 1995; 24(4):451-6. PubMed ID: 7675623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Sensitivity to feature displacement in familiar and unfamiliar faces: beyond the internal/external feature distinction.
    Brooks KR; Kemp RI
    Perception; 2007; 36(11):1646-59. PubMed ID: 18265845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. An inner face advantage in children's recognition of familiar peers.
    Ge L; Anzures G; Wang Z; Kelly DJ; Pascalis O; Quinn PC; Slater AM; Yang Z; Lee K
    J Exp Child Psychol; 2008 Oct; 101(2):124-36. PubMed ID: 18639888
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Configural face encoding and spatial frequency information.
    Boutet I; Collin C; Faubert J
    Percept Psychophys; 2003 Oct; 65(7):1078-93. PubMed ID: 14674634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Familiar and unfamiliar face recognition: a review.
    Johnston RA; Edmonds AJ
    Memory; 2009 Jul; 17(5):577-96. PubMed ID: 19548173
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Holistic face processing can inhibit recognition of forensic facial composites.
    McIntyre AH; Hancock PJ; Frowd CD; Langton SR
    Law Hum Behav; 2016 Apr; 40(2):128-35. PubMed ID: 26436334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The influence of attention on holistic face encoding.
    Boutet I; Gentes-Hawn A; Chaudhuri A
    Cognition; 2002 Jul; 84(3):321-41. PubMed ID: 12044738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The Cambridge Face Memory Test: results for neurologically intact individuals and an investigation of its validity using inverted face stimuli and prosopagnosic participants.
    Duchaine B; Nakayama K
    Neuropsychologia; 2006; 44(4):576-85. PubMed ID: 16169565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Order of feature recognition in familiar and unfamiliar faces.
    Hines D; Braun JA
    Brain Cogn; 1990 Nov; 14(2):165-84. PubMed ID: 2285511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.