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 *

126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17433399)

  • 1. No previews are good news: using preview search to probe categorical grouping for orientation.
    Hodsoll JP; Humphreys GW
    Vision Res; 2007 May; 47(11):1464-78. PubMed ID: 17433399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Filtering items of mass distraction: top-down biases against distractors are necessary for the feature-based carry-over to occur.
    Braithwaite JJ; Humphreys GW
    Vision Res; 2007 Jun; 47(12):1570-83. PubMed ID: 17459447
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Does previewing one stimulus feature help conjunction search?
    Olds ES; Fockler KA
    Perception; 2004; 33(2):195-216. PubMed ID: 15109162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The effect of target foreknowledge on visual search for categorically separable orientation targets.
    Hodsoll JP; Humphreys GW
    Vision Res; 2005 Aug; 45(18):2346-51. PubMed ID: 15913702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Color-based grouping and inhibition in visual search: evidence from a probe detection analysis of preview search.
    Braithwaite JJ; Humphreys GW; Hulleman J
    Percept Psychophys; 2005 Jan; 67(1):81-101. PubMed ID: 15912874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Temporal Binding and Segmentation in Visual Search: A Computational Neuroscience Analysis.
    Mavritsaki E; Humphreys G
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2016 Oct; 28(10):1553-67. PubMed ID: 27243617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. An onset advantage without a preview benefit: neuropsychological evidence separating onset and preview effects in search.
    Humphreys GW; Olivers CN; Yoon EY
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2006 Jan; 18(1):110-20. PubMed ID: 16417687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. History matters: the preview benefit in search is not onset capture.
    Kunar MA; Humphreys GW; Smith KJ
    Psychol Sci; 2003 Mar; 14(2):181-5. PubMed ID: 12661682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Selection of new objects by onset capture and visual marking.
    Osugi T; Hayashi D; Murakami I
    Vision Res; 2016 May; 122():21-33. PubMed ID: 27001341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Visual marking inhibits singleton capture.
    Olivers CN; Humphreys GW
    Cogn Psychol; 2003 Aug; 47(1):1-42. PubMed ID: 12852934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Perceptual grouping constrains inhibition in time-based visual selection.
    Zupan Z; Watson DG
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2020 Feb; 82(2):500-517. PubMed ID: 31875319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Region-based shielding of visual search from salient distractors: Target detection is impaired with same- but not different-dimension distractors.
    Sauter M; Liesefeld HR; Zehetleitner M; Müller HJ
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2018 Apr; 80(3):622-642. PubMed ID: 29299850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Color grouping in space and time: evidence from negative color-based carryover effects in preview search.
    Braithwaite JJ; Humphreys GW; Hodsoll J
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2003 Aug; 29(4):758-78. PubMed ID: 12967220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. An analysis of the time course of attention in preview search.
    Humphreys GW; Stalmann BJ; Olivers C
    Percept Psychophys; 2004 Jul; 66(5):713-30. PubMed ID: 15495898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Visual marking: the effects of irrelevant changes on preview search.
    Watson DG; Humphreys GW
    Percept Psychophys; 2005 Apr; 67(3):418-34. PubMed ID: 16119391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Flexible feature-based inhibition in visual search mediates magnified impairments of selection: evidence from carry-over effects under dynamic preview-search conditions.
    Andrews LS; Watson DG; Humphreys GW; Braithwaite JJ
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2011 Aug; 37(4):1007-16. PubMed ID: 21553995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Visual marking and change blindness: moving occluders and transient masks neutralize shape changes to ignored objects.
    Watson DG; Kunar MA
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2010 Dec; 36(6):1391-405. PubMed ID: 20853998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Electrophysiological correlates of active suppression and attentional selection in preview visual search.
    Berggren N; Eimer M
    Neuropsychologia; 2018 Nov; 120():75-85. PubMed ID: 30359651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Attentional Capture to a Singleton Distractor Degrades Visual Marking in Visual Search.
    Yamauchi K; Osugi T; Murakami I
    Front Psychol; 2017; 8():801. PubMed ID: 28559878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. "Transient structures": the effects of practice and distractor grouping on within-dimension conjunction searches.
    Carrasco M; Ponte D; Rechea C; Sampedro MJ
    Percept Psychophys; 1998 Oct; 60(7):1243-58. PubMed ID: 9821785
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.