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 *

178 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19289361)

  • 1. Strengthening the case for stimulus-specificity in artificial grammar learning: no evidence for abstract representations with extended exposure.
    Johansson T
    Exp Psychol; 2009; 56(3):188-97. PubMed ID: 19289361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Statistical learning within and between modalities: pitting abstract against stimulus-specific representations.
    Conway CM; Christiansen MH
    Psychol Sci; 2006 Oct; 17(10):905-12. PubMed ID: 17100792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Goal relevance and artificial grammar learning.
    Eitam B; Schul Y; Hassin RR
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2009 Feb; 62(2):228-38. PubMed ID: 19058050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Stimulus set size and statistical coverage of the grammar in artificial grammar learning.
    Poletiek FH; van Schijndel TJ
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2009 Dec; 16(6):1058-64. PubMed ID: 19966255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Constrained formation of object representations.
    O'Connor KJ; Potter MC
    Psychol Sci; 2002 Mar; 13(2):106-11. PubMed ID: 11933992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Individual strategies in artificial grammar learning.
    Visser I; Raijmakers ME; Pothos EM
    Am J Psychol; 2009; 122(3):293-307. PubMed ID: 19827700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Semantics boosts syntax in artificial grammar learning tasks with recursion.
    Fedor A; Varga M; Szathmáry E
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2012 May; 38(3):776-82. PubMed ID: 22268913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Implicit learning of semantic category sequences: response-independent acquisition of abstract sequential regularities.
    Goschke T; Bolte A
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2007 Mar; 33(2):394-406. PubMed ID: 17352620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Representational change and analogy: how analogical inferences alter target representations.
    Blanchette I; Dunbar K
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2002 Jul; 28(4):672-85. PubMed ID: 12109761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The architecture of intuition: Fluency and affect determine intuitive judgments of semantic and visual coherence and judgments of grammaticality in artificial grammar learning.
    Topolinski S; Strack F
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2009 Feb; 138(1):39-63. PubMed ID: 19203169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Individual behavior in learning of an artificial grammar.
    Zimmerer VC; Cowell PE; Varley RA
    Mem Cognit; 2011 Apr; 39(3):491-501. PubMed ID: 21264600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. What is learned about fragments in artificial grammar learning? A transitional probabilities approach.
    Poletiek FH; Wolters G
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2009 May; 62(5):868-76. PubMed ID: 19065286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Transfer in artificial grammar learning: the role of repetition information.
    Lotz A; Kinder A
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2006 Jul; 32(4):707-15. PubMed ID: 16822142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Implicit learning and reading: insights from typical children and children with developmental dyslexia using the artificial grammar learning (AGL) paradigm.
    Pavlidou EV; Williams JM
    Res Dev Disabil; 2014 Jul; 35(7):1457-72. PubMed ID: 24751907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Syntactic structure and artificial grammar learning: the learnability of embedded hierarchical structures.
    de Vries MH; Monaghan P; Knecht S; Zwitserlood P
    Cognition; 2008 May; 107(2):763-74. PubMed ID: 17963740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Domain-specific learning of grammatical structure in musical and phonological sequences.
    Bly BM; Carrión RE; Rasch B
    Mem Cognit; 2009 Jan; 37(1):10-20. PubMed ID: 19103971
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Interactions between encoding and retrieval in the domain of sequence-learning.
    Perlman A; Tzelgov J
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2006 Jan; 32(1):118-30. PubMed ID: 16478345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Implicit learning is intact in adult developmental dyslexic readers: evidence from the serial reaction time task and artificial grammar learning.
    Rüsseler J; Gerth I; Münte TF
    J Clin Exp Neuropsychol; 2006 Jul; 28(5):808-27. PubMed ID: 16723326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Verbalizing events: overshadowing or facilitation?
    Huff M; Schwan S
    Mem Cognit; 2008 Mar; 36(2):392-402. PubMed ID: 18426068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Instruction effects in implicit artificial grammar learning: a preference for grammaticality.
    Forkstam C; Elwér A; Ingvar M; Petersson KM
    Brain Res; 2008 Jul; 1221():80-92. PubMed ID: 18561897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.