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 *

166 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22086649)

  • 1. Readers' use of source information in text comprehension.
    Braasch JL; Rouet JF; Vibert N; Britt MA
    Mem Cognit; 2012 Apr; 40(3):450-65. PubMed ID: 22086649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. From simple agents to information sources: Readers' differential processing of story characters as a function of story consistency.
    Saux G; Vibert N; Dampuré J; Burin DI; Britt MA; Rouet JF
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2021 Jan; 212():103191. PubMed ID: 33147538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Conflicting but close: Readers' integration of information sources as a function of their disagreement.
    Saux G; Britt A; Le Bigot L; Vibert N; Burin D; Rouet JF
    Mem Cognit; 2017 Jan; 45(1):151-167. PubMed ID: 27531139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Credible narrators and misinformed readers.
    Houghton KJ; Poirier RC; Klin CM
    Mem Cognit; 2023 May; 51(4):825-844. PubMed ID: 36450939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Individual differences in story comprehension and recall of poor readers.
    Wilkinson IA; Elkins J; Bain JD
    Br J Educ Psychol; 1995 Dec; 65 ( Pt 4)():393-407. PubMed ID: 8580046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Vertical perceptual span and the processing of visual signals in reading.
    Cauchard F; Eyrolle H; Cellier JM; Hyönä J
    Int J Psychol; 2010 Feb; 45(1):40-7. PubMed ID: 22043847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Does mood influence text processing and comprehension? Evidence from an eye-movement study.
    Scrimin S; Mason L
    Br J Educ Psychol; 2015 Sep; 85(3):387-406. PubMed ID: 26010020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effects of context and discrepancy when reading multiple documents.
    Schoor C; Rouet JF; Britt MA
    Read Writ; 2023; 36(5):1111-1143. PubMed ID: 35789786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. How valence affects language processing: Negativity bias and mood congruence in narrative comprehension.
    Egidi G; Gerrig RJ
    Mem Cognit; 2009 Jul; 37(5):547-55. PubMed ID: 19487747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A measure of individual differences in readers' approaches to text and its relation to reading experience and reading comprehension.
    Calloway RC; Helder A; Perfetti CA
    Behav Res Methods; 2023 Feb; 55(2):899-931. PubMed ID: 35505178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Do adult readers know how they read? Evidence from eye movement patterns and verbal reports.
    Hyönä J; Nurminen AM
    Br J Psychol; 2006 Feb; 97(Pt 1):31-50. PubMed ID: 16464286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Revising what readers know: updating text representations during narrative comprehension.
    Rapp DN; Kendeou P
    Mem Cognit; 2007 Dec; 35(8):2019-32. PubMed ID: 18265617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The role of prior knowledge and elaboration in text comprehension and memory: a comparison of self-generated elaboration and text-provided elaboration.
    Kim SI; Van Dusen LM
    Am J Psychol; 1998; 111(3):353-78. PubMed ID: 9805361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Reading strategies and prior knowledge in learning from hypertext.
    Salmerón L; Kintsch W; Cañas JJ
    Mem Cognit; 2006 Jul; 34(5):1157-71. PubMed ID: 17128614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Learning disabled and average readers' working memory and comprehension: does metacognition play a role?
    Swanson HL; Trahan M
    Br J Educ Psychol; 1996 Sep; 66 ( Pt 3)():333-55. PubMed ID: 8828393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Individual differences in syntactic ambiguity resolution: readers vary in their use of plausibility information.
    Long DL; Prat CS
    Mem Cognit; 2008 Mar; 36(2):375-91. PubMed ID: 18426067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Rules of engagement: incomplete and complete pronoun resolution.
    Love J; McKoon G
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2011 Jul; 37(4):874-87. PubMed ID: 21480757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts.
    Kendeou P; Van den Broek P
    Mem Cognit; 2007 Oct; 35(7):1567-77. PubMed ID: 18062535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Resolution of activated background information in text comprehension.
    Wang R; Mo L; He X; Smythe I; Wang S
    Int J Psychol; 2010 Aug; 45(4):241-9. PubMed ID: 22044009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.