226 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19370482)
1. When underadditivity of factor effects in the Psychological Refractory Period paradigm implies a bottleneck: evidence from psycholinguistics.
Besner D; Reynolds M; O'Malley S
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2009 Nov; 62(11):2222-34. PubMed ID: 19370482
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Reading aloud: spelling-sound translation uses central attention.
O'Malley S; Reynolds MG; Stolz JA; Besner D
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2008 Mar; 34(2):422-9. PubMed ID: 18315417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Reading aloud is not automatic: processing capacity is required to generate a phonological code from print.
Reynolds M; Besner D
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2006 Dec; 32(6):1303-23. PubMed ID: 17154774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. All-or-none bottleneck versus capacity sharing accounts of the psychological refractory period phenomenon.
Tombu M; Jolicoeur P
Psychol Res; 2002 Nov; 66(4):274-86. PubMed ID: 12466925
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Viewer perspective affects central bottleneck requirements in spatial translation tasks.
Franz EA; Sebastian A; Hust C; Norris T
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2008 Apr; 34(2):398-412. PubMed ID: 18377178
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Locus of semantic interference in picture naming: Evidence from dual-task performance.
Piai V; Roelofs A; Schriefers H
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2014 Jan; 40(1):147-65. PubMed ID: 23895445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The source of execution-related dual-task interference: motor bottleneck or response monitoring?
Bratzke D; Rolke B; Ulrich R
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2009 Oct; 35(5):1413-26. PubMed ID: 19803646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Central interference in driving: is there any stopping the psychological refractory period?
Levy J; Pashler H; Boer E
Psychol Sci; 2006 Mar; 17(3):228-35. PubMed ID: 16507063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Dual route for subtask order control: Evidence from the psychological refractory paradigm.
Luria R; Meiran N
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2006 Apr; 59(4):720-44. PubMed ID: 16707359
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A PRP-study to determine the locus of target priming effects.
Klapötke S; Krüger D; Mattler U
Conscious Cogn; 2011 Sep; 20(3):882-900. PubMed ID: 21570320
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Response activation in overlapping tasks and the response-selection bottleneck.
Schubert T; Fischer R; Stelzel C
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2008 Apr; 34(2):376-97. PubMed ID: 18377177
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Modularity beyond perception: evidence from the PRP paradigm.
Magen H; Cohen A
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2010 Apr; 36(2):395-414. PubMed ID: 20364926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Response grouping in the psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm: models and contamination effects.
Ulrich R; Miller J
Cogn Psychol; 2008 Sep; 57(2):75-121. PubMed ID: 18262510
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Decomposing sources of response slowing in the PRP paradigm.
Jentzsch I; Leuthold H; Ulrich R
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2007 Jun; 33(3):610-26. PubMed ID: 17563225
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Contingent capture of visual-spatial attention depends on capacity-limited central mechanisms: evidence from human electrophysiology and the psychological refractory period.
Brisson B; Leblanc E; Jolicoeur P
Biol Psychol; 2009 Feb; 80(2):218-25. PubMed ID: 19000734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Attentional limits in memory retrieval-revisited.
Green C; Johnston JC; Ruthruff E
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2011 Aug; 37(4):1083-98. PubMed ID: 21517217
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Multisession, dual-task psychological refractory period practice benefits older and younger adults equally.
Allen PA; Ruthruff E; Elicker JD; Lien MC
Exp Aging Res; 2009 Oct; 35(4):369-99. PubMed ID: 20183098
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Processing two tasks with varying task order: central stage duration influences central processing order.
Ruiz Fernández S; Leonhard T; Rolke B; Ulrich R
Acta Psychol (Amst); 2011 May; 137(1):10-7. PubMed ID: 21427007
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. On the locus of dual-task interference: Is there a bottleneck at the stimulus classification stage?
Johnston JC; McCann RS
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2006 Apr; 59(4):694-719. PubMed ID: 16707358
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Stress improves task processing efficiency in dual-tasks.
Beste C; Yildiz A; Meissner TW; Wolf OT
Behav Brain Res; 2013 Sep; 252():260-5. PubMed ID: 23769959
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
