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 *

223 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22012343)

  • 1. The Cambridge Car Memory Test: a task matched in format to the Cambridge Face Memory Test, with norms, reliability, sex differences, dissociations from face memory, and expertise effects.
    Dennett HW; McKone E; Tavashmi R; Hall A; Pidcock M; Edwards M; Duchaine B
    Behav Res Methods; 2012 Jun; 44(2):587-605. PubMed ID: 22012343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Diagnosing prosopagnosia: effects of ageing, sex, and participant-stimulus ethnic match on the Cambridge Face Memory Test and Cambridge Face Perception Test.
    Bowles DC; McKone E; Dawel A; Duchaine B; Palermo R; Schmalzl L; Rivolta D; Wilson CE; Yovel G
    Cogn Neuropsychol; 2009 Jul; 26(5):423-55. PubMed ID: 19921582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The Cambridge Face Memory Test: results for neurologically intact individuals and an investigation of its validity using inverted face stimuli and prosopagnosic participants.
    Duchaine B; Nakayama K
    Neuropsychologia; 2006; 44(4):576-85. PubMed ID: 16169565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Dissociations of face and object recognition in developmental prosopagnosia.
    Duchaine B; Nakayama K
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2005 Feb; 17(2):249-61. PubMed ID: 15811237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Face recognition performance of individuals with Asperger syndrome on the Cambridge Face Memory Test.
    Hedley D; Brewer N; Young R
    Autism Res; 2011 Dec; 4(6):449-55. PubMed ID: 22162360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Evaluating object recognition ability in developmental prosopagnosia using the Cambridge Car Memory Test.
    Gray KLH; Biotti F; Cook R
    Cogn Neuropsychol; 2019; 36(1-2):89-96. PubMed ID: 30973292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Visual expertise with pictures of cars correlates with RT magnitude of the car inversion effect.
    Rossion B; Curran T
    Perception; 2010; 39(2):173-83. PubMed ID: 20402240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The Vanderbilt Expertise Test reveals domain-general and domain-specific sex effects in object recognition.
    McGugin RW; Richler JJ; Herzmann G; Speegle M; Gauthier I
    Vision Res; 2012 Sep; 69():10-22. PubMed ID: 22877929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Learning task affects ERP-correlates of the own-race bias, but not recognition memory performance.
    Stahl J; Wiese H; Schweinberger SR
    Neuropsychologia; 2010 Jun; 48(7):2027-40. PubMed ID: 20362599
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Visual search for complex objects: Set-size effects for faces, words and cars.
    Hemström J; Albonico A; Djouab S; Barton JJS
    Vision Res; 2019 Sep; 162():8-19. PubMed ID: 31233767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Sex differences in unfamiliar face identification: evidence from matching tasks.
    Megreya AM; Bindemann M; Havard C
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2011 May; 137(1):83-9. PubMed ID: 21459354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Are Face and Object Recognition Independent? A Neurocomputational Modeling Exploration.
    Wang P; Gauthier I; Cottrell G
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2016 Apr; 28(4):558-74. PubMed ID: 26741802
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Early maturity of face recognition: no childhood development of holistic processing, novel face encoding, or face-space.
    Crookes K; McKone E
    Cognition; 2009 May; 111(2):219-47. PubMed ID: 19296930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The M170 is selective for faces, not for expertise.
    Xu Y; Liu J; Kanwisher N
    Neuropsychologia; 2005; 43(4):588-97. PubMed ID: 15716149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Probing the face-space of individuals with prosopagnosia.
    Nishimura M; Doyle J; Humphreys K; Behrmann M
    Neuropsychologia; 2010 May; 48(6):1828-41. PubMed ID: 20227431
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Using regression to measure holistic face processing reveals a strong link with face recognition ability.
    DeGutis J; Wilmer J; Mercado RJ; Cohan S
    Cognition; 2013 Jan; 126(1):87-100. PubMed ID: 23084178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Sex differences for the recognition of direct versus averted gaze faces.
    Goodman LR; Phelan HL; Johnson SA
    Memory; 2012; 20(3):199-209. PubMed ID: 22292806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Category-sensitivity in the N170 range: a question of topography and inversion, not one of amplitude.
    Boehm SG; Dering B; Thierry G
    Neuropsychologia; 2011 Jun; 49(7):2082-9. PubMed ID: 21477606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Parsing the recognition memory components of the WMS-III face memory subtest: normative data and clinical findings in dementia groups.
    Holdnack JA; Delis DC
    J Clin Exp Neuropsychol; 2004 Jun; 26(4):459-83. PubMed ID: 15512935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. General object recognition is specific: Evidence from novel and familiar objects.
    Richler JJ; Wilmer JB; Gauthier I
    Cognition; 2017 Sep; 166():42-55. PubMed ID: 28554084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.