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 *

170 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18426067)

  • 1. Individual differences in syntactic ambiguity resolution: readers vary in their use of plausibility information.
    Long DL; Prat CS
    Mem Cognit; 2008 Mar; 36(2):375-91. PubMed ID: 18426067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Working memory constraints on the processing of syntactic ambiguity.
    MacDonald MC; Just MA; Carpenter PA
    Cogn Psychol; 1992 Jan; 24(1):56-98. PubMed ID: 1537232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Processing Italian relative clauses: working memory span and word order effects on RTs.
    Di Domenico A; Di Matteo R
    J Gen Psychol; 2009 Oct; 136(4):387-406. PubMed ID: 19943612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Chinese subject-relative clauses are more difficult to process than the object-relative clauses.
    Chen B; Ning A; Bi H; Dunlap S
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2008 Sep; 129(1):61-5. PubMed ID: 18538740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Similarity-based interference during language comprehension: Evidence from eye tracking during reading.
    Gordon PC; Hendrick R; Johnson M; Lee Y
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2006 Nov; 32(6):1304-21. PubMed ID: 17087585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Working memory constraints on syntactic ambiguity resolution as revealed by electrical brain responses.
    Friederici AD; Steinhauer K; Mecklinger A; Meyer M
    Biol Psychol; 1998 Mar; 47(3):193-221. PubMed ID: 9564450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Relational processing and working memory capacity in comprehension of relative clause sentences.
    Andrews G; Birney D; Halford GS
    Mem Cognit; 2006 Sep; 34(6):1325-40. PubMed ID: 17225512
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. On the cost of syntactic ambiguity in human language comprehension: an individual differences approach.
    Bornkessel ID; Fiebach CJ; Friederici AD
    Brain Res Cogn Brain Res; 2004 Sep; 21(1):11-21. PubMed ID: 15325409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A hierarchical linear modeling analysis of working memory and implicit prosody in the resolution of adjunct attachment ambiguity.
    Traxler MJ
    J Psycholinguist Res; 2009 Oct; 38(5):491-509. PubMed ID: 19377881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Utilization of prosodic information in syntactic ambiguity resolution.
    Dede G
    J Psycholinguist Res; 2010 Aug; 39(4):345-74. PubMed ID: 20033849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Limitations on the use of verb information during sentence comprehension.
    Kennison SM
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2001 Mar; 8(1):132-8. PubMed ID: 11340858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Competition and working memory in sentence reading: Evidence from Spanish.
    Togato G; Macizo P
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2020 Dec; 74(4):316-329. PubMed ID: 31971436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. What this construction needs is generalized.
    Kaschak MP
    Mem Cognit; 2006 Mar; 34(2):368-79. PubMed ID: 16752600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Neural correlates of syntactic ambiguity in sentence comprehension for low and high span readers.
    Fiebach CJ; Vos SH; Friederici AD
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2004 Nov; 16(9):1562-75. PubMed ID: 15601519
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comprehension of temporal terms by good and poor readers.
    Macaruso P; Bar-Shalom E; Crain S; Shankweiler D
    Lang Speech; 1989; 32 ( Pt 1)():45-67. PubMed ID: 2622300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The role of pragmatic principles in resolving attachment ambiguities: evidence from eye movements.
    Traxler MJ; Frazier L
    Mem Cognit; 2008 Mar; 36(2):314-28. PubMed ID: 18426063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Resolving syntactic-semantic conflicts: comprehension and processing patterns by deaf Chinese readers.
    Cheng Q; Yan X; Yang L; Lin H
    J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ; 2024 Jun; 29(3):396-411. PubMed ID: 38439566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Intersentential syntactic context effects on comprehension: the role of working memory.
    Vos SH; Friederici AD
    Brain Res Cogn Brain Res; 2003 Mar; 16(1):111-22. PubMed ID: 12589896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Use of verb information in syntactic parsing: evidence from eye movements and word-by-word self-paced reading.
    Ferreira F; Henderson JM
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 1990 Jul; 16(4):555-68. PubMed ID: 2142952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Aging and individual differences in binding during sentence understanding: evidence from temporary and global syntactic attachment ambiguities.
    Payne BR; Grison S; Gao X; Christianson K; Morrow DG; Stine-Morrow EA
    Cognition; 2014 Feb; 130(2):157-73. PubMed ID: 24291806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.