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 *

154 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22288696)

  • 1. Inhibitory effects on response force in the stop-signal paradigm.
    Ko YT; Alsford T; Miller J
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2012 Apr; 38(2):465-77. PubMed ID: 22288696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effects of stop signal modality, stop signal intensity and tracking method on inhibitory performance as determined by use of the stop signal paradigm.
    van der Schoot M; Licht R; Horsley TM; Sergeant JA
    Scand J Psychol; 2005 Aug; 46(4):331-41. PubMed ID: 16014077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The interplay of stop signal inhibition and inhibition of return.
    Taylor TL; Ivanoff J
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2003 Nov; 56(8):1349-71. PubMed ID: 14578089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Mechanisms and dynamics of cortical motor inhibition in the stop-signal paradigm: a TMS study.
    van den Wildenberg WP; Burle B; Vidal F; van der Molen MW; Ridderinkhof KR; Hasbroucq T
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2010 Feb; 22(2):225-39. PubMed ID: 19400674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. ERP components associated with successful and unsuccessful stopping in a stop-signal task.
    Kok A; Ramautar JR; De Ruiter MB; Band GP; Ridderinkhof KR
    Psychophysiology; 2004 Jan; 41(1):9-20. PubMed ID: 14692996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Processing of global and selective stop signals: application of Donders' subtraction method to stop-signal task performance.
    van de Laar MC; van den Wildenberg WP; van Boxtel GJ; van der Molen MW
    Exp Psychol; 2010; 57(2):149-59. PubMed ID: 20178958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Developmental trends in simple and selective inhibition of compatible and incompatible responses.
    van den Wildenberg WP; van der Molen MW
    J Exp Child Psychol; 2004 Mar; 87(3):201-20. PubMed ID: 14972598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Post-stop-signal adjustments: inhibition improves subsequent inhibition.
    Bissett PG; Logan GD
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2012 Jul; 38(4):955-66. PubMed ID: 22268912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Automaticity of cognitive control: goal priming in response-inhibition paradigms.
    Verbruggen F; Logan GD
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2009 Sep; 35(5):1381-8. PubMed ID: 19686032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The development of selective inhibitory control: the influence of verbal labeling.
    Kray J; Kipp KH; Karbach J
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2009 Jan; 130(1):48-57. PubMed ID: 19084817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effects of stop-signal probability in the stop-signal paradigm: the N2/P3 complex further validated.
    Ramautar JR; Kok A; Ridderinkhof KR
    Brain Cogn; 2004 Nov; 56(2):234-52. PubMed ID: 15518938
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Dynamics of response-conflict monitoring and individual differences in response control and behavioral control: an electrophysiological investigation using a stop-signal task.
    Stahl J; Gibbons H
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2007 Mar; 118(3):581-96. PubMed ID: 17188565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. How to stop and change a response: the role of goal activation in multitasking.
    Verbruggen F; Schneider DW; Logan GD
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2008 Oct; 34(5):1212-28. PubMed ID: 18823206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Dissociating consciousness from inhibitory control: evidence for unconsciously triggered response inhibition in the stop-signal task.
    van Gaal S; Ridderinkhof KR; van den Wildenberg WP; Lamme VA
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2009 Aug; 35(4):1129-39. PubMed ID: 19653754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Stop-signal task difficulty and the right inferior frontal gyrus.
    Hughes ME; Johnston PJ; Fulham WR; Budd TW; Michie PT
    Behav Brain Res; 2013 Nov; 256():205-13. PubMed ID: 23973765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Stopping while going! Response inhibition does not suffer dual-task interference.
    Yamaguchi M; Logan GD; Bissett PG
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2012 Feb; 38(1):123-34. PubMed ID: 21574740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Inhibitory motor control in apneic and insomniac patients: a stop task study.
    Sagaspe P; Philip P; Schwartz S
    J Sleep Res; 2007 Dec; 16(4):381-7. PubMed ID: 18036083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Probability effects in the stop-signal paradigm: the insula and the significance of failed inhibition.
    Ramautar JR; Slagter HA; Kok A; Ridderinkhof KR
    Brain Res; 2006 Aug; 1105(1):143-54. PubMed ID: 16616048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The auditory-evoked N2 and P3 components in the stop-signal task: indices of inhibition, response-conflict or error-detection?
    Dimoska A; Johnstone SJ; Barry RJ
    Brain Cogn; 2006 Nov; 62(2):98-112. PubMed ID: 16814442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Response force in probe reaction time tasks: reduction in capacity, response inhibition or bottle neck?].
    Mattes S
    Z Exp Psychol; 2001; 48(3):201-6. PubMed ID: 11486637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.