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 *

198 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19739901)

  • 21. Processing relative clauses varying on syntactic and semantic dimensions: an analysis with event-related potentials.
    Mecklinger A; Schriefers H; Steinhauer K; Friederici AD
    Mem Cognit; 1995 Jul; 23(4):477-94. PubMed ID: 7666761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Relations between mental verb and false belief understanding in Cantonese-speaking children.
    Cheung H; Chen HC; Yeung W
    J Exp Child Psychol; 2009 Oct; 104(2):141-55. PubMed ID: 19524253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. How do we process novel conceptual combinations in context?
    Middleton EL; Rawson KA; Wisniewski EJ
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2011 Apr; 64(4):807-22. PubMed ID: 21104564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Validating presupposed versus focused text information.
    Singer M; Solar KG; Spear J
    Mem Cognit; 2017 Apr; 45(3):456-479. PubMed ID: 27913966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Bilingual lexical access in context: evidence from eye movements during reading.
    Libben MR; Titone DA
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2009 Mar; 35(2):381-90. PubMed ID: 19271853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Understanding metaphors: Is the right hemisphere uniquely involved?
    Kacinik NA; Chiarello C
    Brain Lang; 2007 Feb; 100(2):188-207. PubMed ID: 16325253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The effect of factivity on lexical retrieval and postlexical processes during eye fixations in reading.
    Inhoff AW
    J Psycholinguist Res; 1985 Jan; 14(1):45-56. PubMed ID: 3973836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Responses on a lateralized lexical decision task relate to both reading times and comprehension.
    Michael M
    Brain Cogn; 2009 Dec; 71(3):416-26. PubMed ID: 19559514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Readers' reliance on source credibility in the service of comprehension.
    Sparks JR; Rapp DN
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2011 Jan; 37(1):230-47. PubMed ID: 21244116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Decomposing the relation between Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) and reading ability.
    Arnell KM; Joanisse MF; Klein RM; Busseri MA; Tannock R
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2009 Sep; 63(3):173-84. PubMed ID: 19739900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Distinctiveness and correlation in conceptual structure: behavioral and computational studies.
    Randall B; Moss HE; Rodd JM; Greer M; Tyler LK
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2004 Mar; 30(2):393-406. PubMed ID: 14979813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Does phonological recoding occur during silent reading, and is it necessary for orthographic learning?
    de Jong PF; Bitter DJ; van Setten M; Marinus E
    J Exp Child Psychol; 2009 Nov; 104(3):267-82. PubMed ID: 19608198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. How long does it take to find a cause? An online investigation of implicit causality in sentence production.
    Guerry M; Gimenes M; Caplan D; Rigalleau F
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2006 Sep; 59(9):1535-55. PubMed ID: 16873107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Processing the universal quantifier during sentence comprehension: ERP evidence.
    Jiang X; Tan Y; Zhou X
    Neuropsychologia; 2009 Jul; 47(8-9):1799-815. PubMed ID: 19428412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Visuospatial cues for reinstating mental models in working memory during interrupted reading.
    Schneider DW; Dixon P
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2009 Sep; 63(3):161-72. PubMed ID: 19739899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Conceptual combination during sentence comprehension: evidence for compositional processes.
    Swinney D; Love T; Walenski M; Smith EE
    Psychol Sci; 2007 May; 18(5):397-400. PubMed ID: 17576278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Exemplar similarity and rule application.
    Hahn U; Prat-Sala M; Pothos EM; Brumby DP
    Cognition; 2010 Jan; 114(1):1-18. PubMed ID: 19815187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Inference vs control sentences: are readers able to detect our intended differences?
    Shears C; Weiss E
    Brain Cogn; 2005 Mar; 57(2):195-7. PubMed ID: 15708216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The importance of causal connections in the comprehension of spontaneous spoken discourse.
    Cevasco J; van den Broek P
    Psicothema; 2008 Nov; 20(4):801-6. PubMed ID: 18940086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Why reread? Evidence from garden-path and local coherence structures.
    Christianson K; Luke SG; Hussey EK; Wochna KL
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2017 Jul; 70(7):1380-1405. PubMed ID: 27150840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.