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 *

255 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17366309)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. The experimental task influences cue competition in human causal learning.
    Melchers KG; Ungör M; Lachnit H
    J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process; 2005 Oct; 31(4):477-83. PubMed ID: 16248733
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Interference between cues of the same outcome depends on the causal interpretation of the events.
    Cobos PL; López FJ; Luque D
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2007 Mar; 60(3):369-86. PubMed ID: 17366306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. On the role of causal intervention in multiple-cue judgment: positive and negative effects on learning.
    Enkvist T; Newell B; Juslin P; Olsson H
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2006 Jan; 32(1):163-79. PubMed ID: 16478348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Asymmetries in cue competition in forward and backward blocking designs: Further evidence for causal model theory.
    Booth SL; Buehner MJ
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2007 Mar; 60(3):387-99. PubMed ID: 17366307
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Partial reinforcement and context switch effects in human predictive learning.
    Abad MJ; Ramos-Alvarez MM; Rosas JM
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2009 Jan; 62(1):174-88. PubMed ID: 18609387
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Outcome maximality and additivity training also influence cue competition in causal learning when learning involves many cues and events.
    Vandorpe S; De Houwer J; Beckers T
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2007 Mar; 60(3):356-68. PubMed ID: 17366305
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Driven by power? Probe question and presentation format effects on causal judgment.
    Perales JC; Shanks DR
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2008 Nov; 34(6):1482-94. PubMed ID: 18980409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The effectiveness of feedback in multiple-cue probability learning.
    Newell BR; Weston NJ; Tunney RJ; Shanks DR
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2009 May; 62(5):890-908. PubMed ID: 18932062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Contingency bias in probability judgement may arise from ambiguity regarding additional causes.
    Mitchell CJ; Griffiths O; More P; Lovibond PF
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2013 Sep; 66(9):1675-86. PubMed ID: 23350876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Extinction in human learning and memory.
    Scully AL; Mitchell CJ
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2008 Oct; 61(10):1472-8. PubMed ID: 18609395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Information integration in multiple cue judgment: a division of labor hypothesis.
    Juslin P; Karlsson L; Olsson H
    Cognition; 2008 Jan; 106(1):259-98. PubMed ID: 17376423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Positive and negative mediation as a function of whether the absent cue was previously associated with the outcome.
    Castro L; Matute H
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2010 Dec; 63(12):2359-75. PubMed ID: 20603776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.