397 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21803343)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. Task switching and novelty processing activate a common neural network for cognitive control.
Barcelo F; Escera C; Corral MJ; Periáñez JA
J Cogn Neurosci; 2006 Oct; 18(10):1734-48. PubMed ID: 17014377
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Individual differences in aging and cognitive control modulate the neural indexes of context updating and maintenance during task switching.
Adrover-Roig D; Barceló F
Cortex; 2010 Apr; 46(4):434-50. PubMed ID: 19889406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Response priming in the Go/NoGo task: the N2 reflects neither inhibition nor conflict.
Smith JL; Johnstone SJ; Barry RJ
Clin Neurophysiol; 2007 Feb; 118(2):343-55. PubMed ID: 17140848
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The spatial and temporal dynamics of anticipatory preparation and response inhibition in task-switching.
Jamadar S; Hughes M; Fulham WR; Michie PT; Karayanidis F
Neuroimage; 2010 May; 51(1):432-49. PubMed ID: 20123028
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Differential effects of aging on processes underlying task switching.
West R; Travers S
Brain Cogn; 2008 Oct; 68(1):67-80. PubMed ID: 18403080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Neurophysiological markers of alert responding during goal-directed behavior: a high-density electrical mapping study.
Dockree PM; Kelly SP; Robertson IH; Reilly RB; Foxe JJ
Neuroimage; 2005 Sep; 27(3):587-601. PubMed ID: 16024257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparative analysis of event-related potentials during Go/NoGo and CPT: decomposition of electrophysiological markers of response inhibition and sustained attention.
Kirmizi-Alsan E; Bayraktaroglu Z; Gurvit H; Keskin YH; Emre M; Demiralp T
Brain Res; 2006 Aug; 1104(1):114-28. PubMed ID: 16824492
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Cognitive control mechanisms revealed by ERP and fMRI: evidence from repeated task-switching.
Swainson R; Cunnington R; Jackson GM; Rorden C; Peters AM; Morris PG; Jackson SR
J Cogn Neurosci; 2003 Aug; 15(6):785-99. PubMed ID: 14511532
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Event-related potential correlates of task switching and switch costs.
Kieffaber PD; Hetrick WP
Psychophysiology; 2005 Jan; 42(1):56-71. PubMed ID: 15720581
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Conflict and inhibition in the cued-Go/NoGo task.
Randall WM; Smith JL
Clin Neurophysiol; 2011 Dec; 122(12):2400-7. PubMed ID: 21715225
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. ERP indices of persisting and current inhibitory control: a study of saccadic task switching.
Mueller SC; Swainson R; Jackson GM
Neuroimage; 2009 Mar; 45(1):191-7. PubMed ID: 19100841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Cue- versus response-locked processes in backward inhibition: evidence from ERPs.
Sinai M; Goffaux P; Phillips NA
Psychophysiology; 2007 Jul; 44(4):596-609. PubMed ID: 17451492
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A study on the neural mechanism of inhibition of return by the event-related potential in the Go/NoGo task.
Tian Y; Yao D
Biol Psychol; 2008 Oct; 79(2):171-8. PubMed ID: 18524452
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A putative implication for fronto-parietal connectivity in out-of-body experiences.
Easton S; Blanke O; Mohr C
Cortex; 2009 Feb; 45(2):216-27. PubMed ID: 19058798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effects of pre-stimulus processing on subsequent events in a warned Go/NoGo paradigm: response preparation, execution and inhibition.
Smith JL; Johnstone SJ; Barry RJ
Int J Psychophysiol; 2006 Aug; 61(2):121-33. PubMed ID: 16214250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Switch-specific and general preparation map onto different ERP components in a task-switching paradigm.
Karayanidis F; Provost A; Brown S; Paton B; Heathcote A
Psychophysiology; 2011 Apr; 48(4):559-68. PubMed ID: 20718932
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
