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 *

201 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20473686)

  • 1. No-go trials can modulate switch cost by interfering with effects of task preparation.
    Lenartowicz A; Yeung N; Cohen JD
    Psychol Res; 2011 Jan; 75(1):66-76. PubMed ID: 20473686
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The role of response requirements in task switching: dissolving the residue.
    Wylie GR; Javitt DC; Foxe JJ
    Neuroreport; 2004 Apr; 15(6):1079-87. PubMed ID: 15076739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Task-switch costs subsequent to cue-only trials.
    Swainson R; Martin D; Prosser L
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2017 Aug; 70(8):1453-1470. PubMed ID: 27174655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Preparing a task is sufficient to generate a subsequent task-switch cost affecting task performance.
    Swainson R; Prosser LJ; Yamaguchi M
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2024 Jan; 50(1):39-51. PubMed ID: 37498704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Sequence effects in cued task switching modulate response preparedness and repetition priming processes.
    Jamadar S; Michie PT; Karayanidis F
    Psychophysiology; 2010 Mar; 47(2):365-86. PubMed ID: 20003149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Examining binding effects on task switch costs and response-repetition effects: Variations of the cue modality and stimulus modality in task switching.
    Kandalowski SRM; Seibold JC; Schuch S; Koch I
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2020 May; 82(4):1632-1643. PubMed ID: 31820281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The origin of switch costs: task preparation or task application?
    Los SA; Van der Burg E
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2010 Oct; 63(10):1895-915. PubMed ID: 20401813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The effect of performing versus preparing a task on the subsequent switch cost.
    Swainson R; Prosser L; Karavasilev K; Romanczuk A
    Psychol Res; 2021 Feb; 85(1):364-383. PubMed ID: 31624918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Electrophysiological correlates of residual switch costs.
    Gajewski PD; Kleinsorge T; Falkenstein M
    Cortex; 2010 Oct; 46(9):1138-48. PubMed ID: 19717147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Shifting the set of stimulus selection when switching between tasks.
    Wendt M; Luna-Rodriguez A; Jacobsen T
    Psychol Res; 2018 Jan; 82(1):134-145. PubMed ID: 28752317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Task switching and shifting between stopping and going: Developmental change in between-trial control adjustments.
    Huizinga M; van der Molen MW
    J Exp Child Psychol; 2011 Mar; 108(3):484-503. PubMed ID: 21092983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. You can't always get what you want: the influence of unexpected task constraint on voluntary task switching.
    Weaver SM; Foxe JJ; Shpaner M; Wylie GR
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2014; 67(11):2247-59. PubMed ID: 24916773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A brain-potential study of preparation for and execution of a task-switch with stimuli that afford only the relevant task.
    Elchlepp H; Lavric A; Mizon GA; Monsell S
    Hum Brain Mapp; 2012 May; 33(5):1137-54. PubMed ID: 21630376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The role of preparation and cue-modality in crossmodal task switching.
    Lukas S; Philipp AM; Koch I
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2010 Jul; 134(3):318-22. PubMed ID: 20398881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Dissociating neural indices of dynamic cognitive control in advance task-set preparation: an ERP study of task switching.
    Astle DE; Jackson GM; Swainson R
    Brain Res; 2006 Dec; 1125(1):94-103. PubMed ID: 17087918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Distinct neurophysiological mechanisms mediate mixing costs and switch costs.
    Wylie GR; Murray MM; Javitt DC; Foxe JJ
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2009 Jan; 21(1):105-18. PubMed ID: 18476759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Cue-switch effects do not rely on the same neural systems as task-switch effects.
    De Baene W; Brass M
    Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci; 2011 Dec; 11(4):600-7. PubMed ID: 21874602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Diversity of the P3 in the task-switching paradigm.
    Gajewski PD; Falkenstein M
    Brain Res; 2011 Sep; 1411():87-97. PubMed ID: 21803343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Cue-switch costs in task-switching: cue priming or control processes?
    Grange JA; Houghton G
    Psychol Res; 2010 Sep; 74(5):481-90. PubMed ID: 20037766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cognitive control in cued task switching with transition cues: cue processing, task processing, and cue-task transition congruency.
    Van Loy B; Liefooghe B; Vandierendonck A
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2010 Oct; 63(10):1916-35. PubMed ID: 20574933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.