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 *

142 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21517217)

  • 21. The effect of encoding manipulation on word-stem cued recall: an event-related potential study.
    Fay S; Isingrini M; Ragot R; Pouthas V
    Brain Res Cogn Brain Res; 2005 Aug; 24(3):615-26. PubMed ID: 16099370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. How strategic is the central bottleneck: can it be overcome by trying harder?
    Ruthruff E; Johnston JC; Remington RW
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2009 Oct; 35(5):1368-84. PubMed ID: 19803643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Memory retrieval given two independent cues: cue selection or parallel access?
    Rickard TC; Bajic D
    Cogn Psychol; 2004 May; 48(3):243-94. PubMed ID: 15020213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Multiple ways to the prior occurrence of an event: an electrophysiological dissociation of experimental and conceptually driven familiarity in recognition memory.
    Wiegand I; Bader R; Mecklinger A
    Brain Res; 2010 Nov; 1360():106-18. PubMed ID: 20816760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Divided attention at retrieval disrupts knowing but not remembering.
    Knott LM; Dewhurst SA
    Memory; 2007 Aug; 15(6):664-74. PubMed ID: 17654280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Parallel response selection disrupts sequence learning under dual-task conditions.
    Schumacher EH; Schwarb H
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2009 May; 138(2):270-90. PubMed ID: 19397384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. 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]  

  • 28. The control of memory retrieval: insights from event-related potentials.
    Werkle-Bergner M; Mecklinger A; Kray J; Meyer P; Düzel E
    Brain Res Cogn Brain Res; 2005 Aug; 24(3):599-614. PubMed ID: 16099369
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Changes in brain electrical activity during extended continuous word recognition.
    Van Strien JW; Hagenbeek RE; Stam CJ; Rombouts SA; Barkhof F
    Neuroimage; 2005 Jul; 26(3):952-9. PubMed ID: 15955505
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Parallel response selection after callosotomy.
    Hazeltine E; Weinstein A; Ivry RB
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2008 Mar; 20(3):526-40. PubMed ID: 18004953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Vanishing dual-task interference after practice: has the bottleneck been eliminated or is it merely latent?
    Ruthruff E; Johnston JC; Van Selst M; Whitsell S; Remington R
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2003 Apr; 29(2):280-9. PubMed ID: 12760615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Do novel associative word stem completion and cued recall share the same memory retrieval processes?
    Gooding PA; Mayes AR; van Eijk R; Meudell PR; MacDonald FL
    Memory; 1999 May; 7(3):323-43. PubMed ID: 10659081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Individual differences in working memory capacity and episodic retrieval: examining the dynamics of delayed and continuous distractor free recall.
    Unsworth N
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2007 Nov; 33(6):1020-34. PubMed ID: 17983310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Effects of repeated collaborative retrieval on individual memory vary as a function of recall versus recognition tasks.
    Blumen HM; Rajaram S
    Memory; 2009 Nov; 17(8):840-6. PubMed ID: 19882435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Individual differences in working memory capacity determine the effects of oculomotor task load on concurrent word recall performance.
    Lee EJ; Kwon G; Lee A; Ghajar J; Suh M
    Brain Res; 2011 Jul; 1399():59-65. PubMed ID: 21645879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Inhibitory processes in memory are impaired in schizophrenia: evidence from retrieval induced forgetting.
    Soriano MF; Jiménez JF; Román P; Bajo MT
    Br J Psychol; 2009 Nov; 100(Pt 4):661-73. PubMed ID: 19309536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Dual task demands on encoding and retrieval processes: evidence from healthy adult ageing.
    Logie RH; Della Sala S; MacPherson SE; Cooper J
    Cortex; 2007 Jan; 43(1):159-69. PubMed ID: 17334215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The beneficial effects of additional task load, positive affect, and instruction on the attentional blink.
    Olivers CN; Nieuwenhuis S
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2006 Apr; 32(2):364-79. PubMed ID: 16634676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. fMRI evidence of word frequency and strength effects in recognition memory.
    de Zubicaray GI; McMahon KL; Eastburn MM; Finnigan S; Humphreys MS
    Brain Res Cogn Brain Res; 2005 Aug; 24(3):587-98. PubMed ID: 16099368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Information continuity across the response selection bottleneck: early parallel Task 2 response activation contributes to overt Task 2 performance.
    Thomson SJ; Watter S
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2013 Jul; 75(5):934-53. PubMed ID: 23592183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.