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 *

123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22390290)

  • 1. Going rogue in the spatial cuing paradigm: high spatial validity is insufficient to elicit voluntary shifts of attention.
    Davis GJ; Gibson BS
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2012 Oct; 38(5):1192-201. PubMed ID: 22390290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. High spatial validity is not sufficient to elicit voluntary shifts of attention.
    Pauszek JR; Gibson BS
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2016 Oct; 78(7):2110-23. PubMed ID: 27044388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Voluntary and involuntary attention have different consequences: the effect of perceptual difficulty.
    Prinzmetal W; Zvinyatskovskiy A; Gutierrez P; Dilem L
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2009 Feb; 62(2):352-69. PubMed ID: 18609402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Neural mechanisms of attentional shifts due to irrelevant spatial and numerical cues.
    Ranzini M; Dehaene S; Piazza M; Hubbard EM
    Neuropsychologia; 2009 Oct; 47(12):2615-24. PubMed ID: 19465038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Involuntary but not voluntary orienting contributes to a disengage deficit in visual neglect.
    Olk B; Hildebrandt H; Kingstone A
    Cortex; 2010 Oct; 46(9):1149-64. PubMed ID: 19733346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The footprints of visual attention during search with 100% valid and 100% invalid cues.
    Eckstein MP; Pham BT; Shimozaki SS
    Vision Res; 2004 Jun; 44(12):1193-207. PubMed ID: 15066385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Spatial cueing in time-space synesthetes: An event-related brain potential study.
    Teuscher U; Brang D; Ramachandran VS; Coulson S
    Brain Cogn; 2010 Oct; 74(1):35-46. PubMed ID: 20637536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Masked stimuli modulate endogenous shifts of spatial attention.
    Palmer S; Mattler U
    Conscious Cogn; 2013 Jun; 22(2):486-503. PubMed ID: 23528730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Visuospatial attention shifts by gaze and arrow cues: an ERP study.
    Hietanen JK; Leppänen JM; Nummenmaa L; Astikainen P
    Brain Res; 2008 Jun; 1215():123-36. PubMed ID: 18485332
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. On the source and scope of priming effects of masked stimuli on endogenous shifts of spatial attention.
    Palmer S; Mattler U
    Conscious Cogn; 2013 Jun; 22(2):528-44. PubMed ID: 23562857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Action-related objects influence the distribution of visuospatial attention.
    Roberts KL; Humphreys GW
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2011 Apr; 64(4):669-88. PubMed ID: 21113857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. How does attention spread across objects oriented in depth?
    Reppa I; Fougnie D; Schmidt WC
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2010 May; 72(4):912-25. PubMed ID: 20436189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Neural correlates of the spatial and expectancy components of endogenous and stimulus-driven orienting of attention in the Posner task.
    Doricchi F; Macci E; Silvetti M; Macaluso E
    Cereb Cortex; 2010 Jul; 20(7):1574-85. PubMed ID: 19846472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Cueing spatial attention through timing and probability.
    Girardi G; Antonucci G; Nico D
    Cortex; 2013 Jan; 49(1):211-21. PubMed ID: 21982581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. ERP evidence for selective drop in attentional costs in uncertain environments: challenging a purely premotor account of covert orienting of attention.
    Lasaponara S; Chica AB; Lecce F; Lupianez J; Doricchi F
    Neuropsychologia; 2011 Jul; 49(9):2648-57. PubMed ID: 21640737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Interactive activation in visual word recognition: constraints imposed by the joint effects of spatial attention and semantics.
    Stolz JA; Stevanovski B
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2004 Dec; 30(6):1064-76. PubMed ID: 15584815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Guiding attention to specific locations by combining symbolic information about direction and distance: are human observers direction experts?
    Gibson BS; Sztybel P
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2014 Apr; 40(2):731-51. PubMed ID: 24245500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Attention: reaction time and accuracy reveal different mechanisms.
    Prinzmetal W; McCool C; Park S
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2005 Feb; 134(1):73-92. PubMed ID: 15702964
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Beyond attentional bias: a perceptual bias in a dot-probe task.
    Bocanegra BR; Huijding J; Zeelenberg R
    Emotion; 2012 Dec; 12(6):1362-6. PubMed ID: 22642346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The Least Costs Hypothesis: A rational analysis approach to the voluntary symbolic control of attention.
    Pauszek JR; Gibson BS
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2018 Aug; 44(8):1199-1215. PubMed ID: 29708384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.