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.
146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18038959)
21. Two attentional deficits in serial target search: the visual attentional blink and an amodal task-switch deficit. Potter MC; Chun MM; Banks BS; Muckenhoupt M J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 1998 Jul; 24(4):979-92. PubMed ID: 9699304 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Visual, auditory, and cross-modality dual-task costs: electrophysiological evidence for an amodal bottleneck on working memory consolidation. Arnell KM Percept Psychophys; 2006 Apr; 68(3):447-57. PubMed ID: 16900836 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. The meaning of the mask matters: evidence of conceptual interference in the attentional blink. Dux PE; Coltheart V Psychol Sci; 2005 Oct; 16(10):775-9. PubMed ID: 16181439 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. A shared cortical bottleneck underlying Attentional Blink and Psychological Refractory Period. Marti S; Sigman M; Dehaene S Neuroimage; 2012 Feb; 59(3):2883-98. PubMed ID: 21988891 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. The perceptual nature of the cross-modal priming effect: arguments in favor of a sensory-based conception of memory. Vallet G; Brunel L; Versace R Exp Psychol; 2010; 57(5):376-82. PubMed ID: 20178946 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Effect of distractor sounds on the auditory attentional blink. Shen D; Mondor TA Percept Psychophys; 2006 Feb; 68(2):228-43. PubMed ID: 16773896 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Task switching mediates the attentional blink even without backward masking. Kawahara J; Zuvic SM; Enns JT; Di Lollo V Percept Psychophys; 2003 Apr; 65(3):339-51. PubMed ID: 12785064 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. The time-course of the cross-modal semantic modulation of visual picture processing by naturalistic sounds and spoken words. Chen YC; Spence C Multisens Res; 2013; 26(4):371-86. PubMed ID: 24319929 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Similarity determines the attentional blink. Raymond JE; Shapiro KL; Arnell KM J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1995 Jun; 21(3):653-62. PubMed ID: 7790839 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Modulation of the attentional blink by on-line response selection: evidence from speeded and unspeeded task1 decisions. Jolicoeur P Mem Cognit; 1998 Sep; 26(5):1014-32. PubMed ID: 9796233 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Sources of interference in the attentional blink: target-distractor similarity revisited. Maki WS; Bussard G; Lopez K; Digby B Percept Psychophys; 2003 Feb; 65(2):188-201. PubMed ID: 12713238 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. The attentional blink is susceptible to concurrent perceptual processing demands. Christmann C; Leuthold H Q J Exp Psychol A; 2004 Feb; 57(2):357-77. PubMed ID: 14742180 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Cross-modal perceptual load: the impact of modality and individual differences. Sandhu R; Dyson BJ Exp Brain Res; 2016 May; 234(5):1279-91. PubMed ID: 26670905 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. The impact of cross-modal correspondences on working memory performance. Brunetti R; Indraccolo A; Mastroberardino S; Spence C; Santangelo V J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2017 Apr; 43(4):819-831. PubMed ID: 28345948 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Effect of Target Semantic Consistency in Different Sequence Positions and Processing Modes on T2 Recognition: Integration and Suppression Based on Cross-Modal Processing. Yang H; Yue C; Wang C; Wang A; Zhang Z; Luo L Brain Sci; 2023 Feb; 13(2):. PubMed ID: 36831882 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]