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 *

73 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17613799)

  • 1. Prospective memory: the relative effects of encoding, retrieval, and the match between encoding and retrieval.
    Hannon B; Daneman M
    Memory; 2007 Jul; 15(5):572-604. PubMed ID: 17613799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The myth of the encoding-retrieval match.
    Nairne JS
    Memory; 2002; 10(5-6):389-95. PubMed ID: 12396651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Memory as discrimination: a challenge to the encoding-retrieval match principle.
    Poirier M; Nairne JS; Morin C; Zimmermann FG; Koutmeridou K; Fowler J
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2012 Jan; 38(1):16-29. PubMed ID: 21823814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Verbal cues facilitate memory retrieval during infancy.
    Hayne H; Herbert J
    J Exp Child Psychol; 2004 Oct; 89(2):127-39. PubMed ID: 15388302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Encoding specificity manipulations do affect retrieval from memory.
    Zeelenberg R
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2005 May; 119(1):107-21. PubMed ID: 15823245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Hippocampal-neocortical networks differ during encoding and retrieval of relational memory: functional and effective connectivity analyses.
    McCormick C; Moscovitch M; Protzner AB; Huber CG; McAndrews MP
    Neuropsychologia; 2010 Sep; 48(11):3272-81. PubMed ID: 20637787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The effects of divided attention on encoding and retrieval processes: the resiliency of retrieval processes.
    Naveh-Benjamin M; Craik FI; Perretta JG; Tonev ST
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2000 Aug; 53(3):609-25. PubMed ID: 10994220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Directed remembering: subliminal cues alter nonconscious memory strategies.
    Mitchell JP; Macrae CN; Schooler JW; Rowe AC; Milne AB
    Memory; 2002; 10(5-6):381-8. PubMed ID: 12396650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Age-related ERP differences at retrieval persist despite age-invariant performance and left-frontal negativity during encoding.
    Nessler D; Johnson R; Bersick M; Friedman D
    Neurosci Lett; 2008 Feb; 432(2):151-6. PubMed ID: 18226452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Encoding specificity: retrieval asymmetry in the recognition failure paradigm.
    Bartling CA; Thompson CP
    J Exp Psychol Hum Learn; 1977 Nov; 3(6):690-700. PubMed ID: 915447
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Age differences in cued recall and recognition under varying encoding and retrieval conditions.
    West RL; Boatwright LK
    Exp Aging Res; 1983; 9(3):185-9. PubMed ID: 6641780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Neurophysiological correlates of memory illusion in both encoding and retrieval phases.
    Geng H; Qi Y; Li Y; Fan S; Wu Y; Zhu Y
    Brain Res; 2007 Mar; 1136(1):154-68. PubMed ID: 17239833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effects of ongoing task context and target typicality on prospective memory performance: the importance of associative cueing.
    Nowinski JL; Dismukes KR
    Memory; 2005 Aug; 13(6):649-57. PubMed ID: 16076678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The simultaneous learning effect: why does simultaneous task learning improve retention?
    Burns DJ; Ladd MV
    Am J Psychol; 2006; 119(3):385-405. PubMed ID: 17061692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Mood-state-dependent retrieval: the effects of induced mood on memory reconsidered.
    Kenealy PM
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 1997 May; 50(2):290-317. PubMed ID: 9225625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. An asymmetry between memory encoding and retrieval. Revelation, generation, and transfer-appropriate processing.
    Mulligan NW; Lozito JP
    Psychol Sci; 2006 Jan; 17(1):7-11. PubMed ID: 16371137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Testing the myth of the encoding-retrieval match.
    Goh WD; Lu SH
    Mem Cognit; 2012 Jan; 40(1):28-39. PubMed ID: 21830162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Retrieval during learning facilitates subsequent memory encoding.
    Pastötter B; Schicker S; Niedernhuber J; Bäuml KH
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2011 Mar; 37(2):287-97. PubMed ID: 21171804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Fragments of a larger whole: retrieval cues constrain observed neural correlates of memory encoding.
    Otten LJ
    Cereb Cortex; 2007 Sep; 17(9):2030-8. PubMed ID: 17088375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Depth and elaboration of processing in relation to age.
    Simon E
    J Exp Psychol Hum Learn; 1979 Mar; 5(2):115-24. PubMed ID: 521757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.