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 *

107 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22283509)

  • 1. Disruption of writing processes by the semanticity of background speech.
    Sörqvist P; Nöstl A; Halin N
    Scand J Psychol; 2012 Apr; 53(2):97-102. PubMed ID: 22283509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Listening to the sound of silence: disfluent silent pauses in speech have consequences for listeners.
    MacGregor LJ; Corley M; Donaldson DI
    Neuropsychologia; 2010 Dec; 48(14):3982-92. PubMed ID: 20950633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Irrelevant sound disrupts speech production: exploring the relationship between short-term memory and experimentally induced slips of the tongue.
    Saito S; Baddeley A
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2004 Oct; 57(7):1309-40. PubMed ID: 15513248
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Speech versus non-speech as irrelevant sound: controlling acoustic variation.
    Little JS; Martin FH; Thomson RH
    Biol Psychol; 2010 Sep; 85(1):62-70. PubMed ID: 20553792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Written spelling to dictation: Sound-to-spelling regularity affects both writing latencies and durations.
    Delattre M; Bonin P; Barry C
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2006 Nov; 32(6):1330-40. PubMed ID: 17087587
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Synchronized brain activity during rehearsal and short-term memory disruption by irrelevant speech is affected by recall mode.
    Kopp F; Schröger E; Lipka S
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2006 Aug; 61(2):188-203. PubMed ID: 16298003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effects of speech on proofreading: can task-engagement manipulations shield against distraction?
    Halin N; Marsh JE; Haga A; Holmgren M; Sörqvist P
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2014 Mar; 20(1):69-80. PubMed ID: 24099531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Hemispheric asymmetries in auditory distraction.
    Sörqvist P; Marsh JE; Jahncke H
    Brain Cogn; 2010 Nov; 74(2):79-87. PubMed ID: 20688422
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Disruption of short-term memory by distractor speech: does content matter?
    Bell R; Mund I; Buchner A
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2011 Jan; 64(1):146-68. PubMed ID: 20544562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Auditory location in the irrelevant sound effect: The effects of presenting auditory stimuli to either the left ear, right ear or both ears.
    Hadlington L; Bridges AM; Darby RJ
    Brain Cogn; 2004 Aug; 55(3):545-57. PubMed ID: 15223201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Interference by process, not content, determines semantic auditory distraction.
    Marsh JE; Hughes RW; Jones DM
    Cognition; 2009 Jan; 110(1):23-38. PubMed ID: 19081558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Cross-modal distraction by background speech: what role for meaning?
    Marsh JE; Jones DM
    Noise Health; 2010; 12(49):210-6. PubMed ID: 20871175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Detrimental effects of irrelevant speech on serial recall of visual items are reflected in reduced visual N1 and reduced theta activity.
    Weisz N; Schlittmeier SJ
    Cereb Cortex; 2006 Aug; 16(8):1097-105. PubMed ID: 16221927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The interrelation between acoustic context effects and available response categories in speech sound categorization.
    Benders T; Escudero P; Sjerps MJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Apr; 131(4):3079-87. PubMed ID: 22501081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effect of age on silent gap discrimination in synthetic speech stimuli.
    Lister J; Tarver K
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2004 Apr; 47(2):257-68. PubMed ID: 15157128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Perceptual fusion tendency of speech sounds.
    Huang Y; Li J; Zou X; Qu T; Wu X; Mao L; Wu Y; Li L
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2011 Apr; 23(4):1003-14. PubMed ID: 20350060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Altering context speech rate can cause words to appear or disappear.
    Dilley LC; Pitt MA
    Psychol Sci; 2010 Nov; 21(11):1664-70. PubMed ID: 20876883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Semantic retrieval of spoken words with an obliterated initial phoneme in a sentence context.
    Sivonen P; Maess B; Friederici AD
    Neurosci Lett; 2006 Nov; 408(3):220-5. PubMed ID: 17005322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Can the irrelevant speech effect turn into a stimulus suffix effect?
    Schlittmeier SJ; Hellbrück J; Klatte M
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2008 May; 61(5):665-73. PubMed ID: 18421641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Open-plan office noise: the susceptibility and suitability of different cognitive tasks for work in the presence of irrelevant speech.
    Jahncke H
    Noise Health; 2012; 14(61):315-20. PubMed ID: 23257585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.