249 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19034502)
1. Individual differences in conflict-monitoring: testing means and covariance hypothesis about the Simon and the Eriksen Flanker task.
Keye D; Wilhelm O; Oberauer K; van Ravenzwaaij D
Psychol Res; 2009 Nov; 73(6):762-76. PubMed ID: 19034502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Opposing influences on conflict-driven adaptation in the Eriksen flanker task.
Bugg JM
Mem Cognit; 2008 Oct; 36(7):1217-27. PubMed ID: 18927038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The influence of reward in the Simon task: Differences and similarities to the Stroop and Eriksen flanker tasks.
Mittelstädt V; Ulrich R; König J; Hofbauer K; Mackenzie IG
Atten Percept Psychophys; 2023 Apr; 85(3):949-959. PubMed ID: 36316615
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Sequential dependencies in the Eriksen flanker task: a direct comparison of two competing accounts.
Davelaar EJ; Stevens J
Psychon Bull Rev; 2009 Feb; 16(1):121-6. PubMed ID: 19145021
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Adjustments to recent and frequent conflict reflect two distinguishable mechanisms.
Purmann S; Badde S; Wendt M
Psychon Bull Rev; 2009 Apr; 16(2):350-5. PubMed ID: 19293106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Are spatial and dimensional attention separate? evidence from Posner, Stroop, and Eriksen tasks.
Chajut E; Schupak A; Algom D
Mem Cognit; 2009 Sep; 37(6):924-34. PubMed ID: 19679870
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Slow and steady? Strategic adjustments in response caution are moderately reliable and correlate across tasks.
Hedge C; Vivian-Griffiths S; Powell G; Bompas A; Sumner P
Conscious Cogn; 2019 Oct; 75():102797. PubMed ID: 31421398
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. An Investigation of the Reliability and Self-Regulatory Correlates of Conflict Adaptation.
Feldman JL; Freitas AL
Exp Psychol; 2016 Jul; 63(4):237-247. PubMed ID: 27750519
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Effects of conflict trial proportion: A comparison of the Eriksen and Simon tasks.
Bausenhart KM; Ulrich R; Miller J
Atten Percept Psychophys; 2021 Feb; 83(2):810-836. PubMed ID: 33269440
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Interacting congruency effects in the hybrid Stroop-Simon task prevent conclusions regarding the domain specificity or generality of the congruency sequence effect.
Weissman DH
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2020 May; 46(5):945-967. PubMed ID: 31580121
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Conflict control of emotional and non-emotional conflicts in preadolescent children.
Liu T; Liu X; Li D; Shangguan F; Lu L; Shi J
Biol Psychol; 2019 Sep; 146():107708. PubMed ID: 31153934
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Conflict-frequency affects flanker interference: role of stimulus-ensemble-specific practiceand flanker-response contingencies.
Wendt M; Luna-Rodriguez A
Exp Psychol; 2009; 56(3):206-17. PubMed ID: 19289363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A spatial version of the Stroop task for examining proactive and reactive control independently from non-conflict processes.
Spinelli G; Lupker SJ
Atten Percept Psychophys; 2024 May; 86(4):1259-1286. PubMed ID: 38691237
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Conflict resolution in the Eriksen flanker task: Similarities and differences to the Simon task.
Hübner R; Töbel L
PLoS One; 2019; 14(3):e0214203. PubMed ID: 30921368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Dissociation of S-R compatibility and Simon effects with mixed tasks and mappings.
Proctor RW; Yamaguchi M; Dutt V; Gonzalez C
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2013 Apr; 39(2):593-609. PubMed ID: 22963231
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Generality and specificity in cognitive control: conflict adaptation within and across selective-attention tasks but not across selective-attention and Simon tasks.
Freitas AL; Clark SL
Psychol Res; 2015 Jan; 79(1):143-62. PubMed ID: 24487727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Cognitive control controls the effect of irrelevant stimulus-response learning.
Shi K; Wang L
Atten Percept Psychophys; 2024 Apr; 86(3):866-882. PubMed ID: 38413504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Accounting for sequential trial effects in the flanker task: conflict adaptation or associative priming?
Nieuwenhuis S; Stins JF; Posthuma D; Polderman TJ; Boomsma DI; de Geus EJ
Mem Cognit; 2006 Sep; 34(6):1260-72. PubMed ID: 17225507
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The role of task-relevant and task-irrelevant information in congruency sequence effects: Applying the diffusion model for conflict tasks.
Koob V; Mackenzie I; Ulrich R; Leuthold H; Janczyk M
Cogn Psychol; 2023 Feb; 140():101528. PubMed ID: 36584549
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Conflict Adaptation and Cue Competition during Learning in an Eriksen Flanker Task.
Ghinescu R; Schachtman TR; Ramsey AK; Gratton G; Fabiani M
PLoS One; 2016; 11(12):e0167119. PubMed ID: 27941977
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
