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 *

156 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19271859)

  • 1. The role of cue-target translation in backward inhibition of attentional set.
    Houghton G; Pritchard R; Grange JA
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2009 Mar; 35(2):466-76. PubMed ID: 19271859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Heightened conflict in cue-target translation increases backward inhibition in set switching.
    Grange JA; Houghton G
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2010 Jul; 36(4):1003-9. PubMed ID: 20565215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Temporal cue-target overlap is not essential for backward inhibition in task switching.
    Grange JA; Houghton G
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2009 Oct; 62(10):2068-79. PubMed ID: 19225989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Cue-independent task-specific representations in task switching: evidence from backward inhibition.
    Altmann EM
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2007 Sep; 33(5):892-9. PubMed ID: 17723067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. On the uniqueness of attentional capture by uninformative gaze cues: facilitation interacts with the Simon effect and is rarely followed by IOR.
    McKee D; Christie J; Klein R
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2007 Dec; 61(4):293-303. PubMed ID: 18266505
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Cue- versus response-locked processes in backward inhibition: evidence from ERPs.
    Sinai M; Goffaux P; Phillips NA
    Psychophysiology; 2007 Jul; 44(4):596-609. PubMed ID: 17451492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Cueing the location of a distractor: an inhibitory mechanism of spatial attention?
    Munneke J; Van der Stigchel S; Theeuwes J
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2008 Sep; 129(1):101-7. PubMed ID: 18589391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The influence of cue type on backward inhibition.
    Arbuthnott KD
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2005 Sep; 31(5):1030-42. PubMed ID: 16248749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Inhibition of return in subliminal letter priming.
    Marzouki Y; Grainger J; Theeuwes J
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2008 Sep; 129(1):112-20. PubMed ID: 18582840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Attentional changes during implicit learning: signal validity protects a target stimulus from the attentional blink.
    Livesey EJ; Harris IM; Harris JA
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2009 Mar; 35(2):408-22. PubMed ID: 19271855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Saccade trajectory deviations and inhibition-of-return: Measuring the amount of attentional processing.
    Theeuwes J; Van der Stigchel S
    Vision Res; 2009 Jun; 49(10):1307-15. PubMed ID: 18723045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Separating cue encoding from target processing in the explicit task-cuing procedure: are there "true" task switch effects?
    Arrington CM; Logan GD; Schneider DW
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2007 May; 33(3):484-502. PubMed ID: 17470002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Precueing spatial S-R correspondence: is there regulation of expected response conflict?
    Wühr P; Kunde W
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2008 Aug; 34(4):872-83. PubMed ID: 18665732
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Short cue presentations encourage advance task preparation: a recipe to diminish the residual switch cost.
    Verbruggen F; Liefooghe B; Vandierendonck A; Demanet J
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2007 Mar; 33(2):342-56. PubMed ID: 17352616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. On the spatial metric of short-SOA costs of exogenous cuing.
    Chen P; Moore C; Mordkoff JT
    Am J Psychol; 2008; 121(2):229-40. PubMed ID: 18510134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Inhibition in language switching: what is inhibited when switching between languages in naming tasks?
    Philipp AM; Koch I
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2009 Sep; 35(5):1187-95. PubMed ID: 19686014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Conflict-triggered goal shielding: response conflicts attenuate background monitoring for prospective memory cues.
    Goschke T; Dreisbach G
    Psychol Sci; 2008 Jan; 19(1):25-32. PubMed ID: 18181788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Inhibition of return: sensitivity and criterion as a function of response time.
    Ivanoff J; Klein RM
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2006 Aug; 32(4):908-19. PubMed ID: 16846287
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Dysfunctional response preparation and inhibition during a visual Go/No-go task in children with two subtypes of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.
    Johnstone SJ; Clarke AR
    Psychiatry Res; 2009 Apr; 166(2-3):223-37. PubMed ID: 19286266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Task switching versus cue switching: using transition cuing to disentangle sequential effects in task-switching performance.
    Schneider DW; Logan GD
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2007 Mar; 33(2):370-8. PubMed ID: 17352618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.