1086 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22524868)
41. Do handwritten words magnify lexical effects in visual word recognition?
Perea M; Gil-López C; Beléndez V; Carreiras M
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2016; 69(8):1631-47. PubMed ID: 26340587
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. The influence of contextual diversity on eye movements in reading.
Plummer P; Perea M; Rayner K
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2014 Jan; 40(1):275-83. PubMed ID: 23937235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Eye movement correlates of acquired central dyslexia.
Schattka KI; Radach R; Huber W
Neuropsychologia; 2010 Aug; 48(10):2959-73. PubMed ID: 20547168
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Right visual field advantage in parafoveal processing: evidence from eye-fixation-related potentials.
Simola J; Holmqvist K; Lindgren M
Brain Lang; 2009 Nov; 111(2):101-13. PubMed ID: 19782390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. How fast can predictability influence word skipping during reading?
Fitzsimmons G; Drieghe D
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2013 Jul; 39(4):1054-63. PubMed ID: 23244054
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. The effect of word frequency, word predictability, and font difficulty on the eye movements of young and older readers.
Rayner K; Reichle ED; Stroud MJ; Williams CC; Pollatsek A
Psychol Aging; 2006 Sep; 21(3):448-65. PubMed ID: 16953709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Age of acquisition predicts naming and lexical-decision performance above and beyond 22 other predictor variables: an analysis of 2,342 words.
Cortese MJ; Khanna MM
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2007 Aug; 60(8):1072-82. PubMed ID: 17654392
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Oscillatory brain responses in spoken word production reflect lexical frequency and sentential constraint.
Piai V; Roelofs A; Maris E
Neuropsychologia; 2014 Jan; 53():146-56. PubMed ID: 24291513
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Parafoveal load of word N+1 modulates preprocessing effectiveness of word N+2 in Chinese reading.
Yan M; Kliegl R; Shu H; Pan J; Zhou X
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2010 Dec; 36(6):1669-76. PubMed ID: 20731511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. The impact of word prevalence on lexical decision times: Evidence from the Dutch Lexicon Project 2.
Brysbaert M; Stevens M; Mandera P; Keuleers E
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2016 Mar; 42(3):441-58. PubMed ID: 26501839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Frequency and predictability effects in the Dundee Corpus: an eye movement analysis.
Kennedy A; Pynte J; Murray WS; Paul SA
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2013; 66(3):601-18. PubMed ID: 22643118
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. The influence of word shading and word length on eye movements during reading.
Leyland LA; Kirkby JA; Juhasz BJ; Pollatsek A; Liversedge SP
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2013; 66(3):471-86. PubMed ID: 21988376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. [Effects of the lexical-semantic variables in visual word recognition].
Alija M; Cuetos F
Psicothema; 2006 Aug; 18(3):485-91. PubMed ID: 17296076
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. You can't Stroop a lexical decision: is semantic processing fundamentally facilitative?
Schmidt JR; Cheesman J; Besner D
Can J Exp Psychol; 2013 Jun; 67(2):130-9. PubMed ID: 23205510
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. A paradox of apparent brainless behavior: The time-course of compound word recognition.
Schmidtke D; Kuperman V
Cortex; 2019 Jul; 116():250-267. PubMed ID: 30149964
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. The quiet clam is quite calm: transposed-letter neighborhood effects on eye movements during reading.
Johnson RL
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2009 Jul; 35(4):943-69. PubMed ID: 19586263
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Statistical models of morphology predict eye-tracking measures during visual word recognition.
Lehtonen M; Varjokallio M; Kivikari H; Hultén A; Virpioja S; Hakala T; Kurimo M; Lagus K; Salmelin R
Mem Cognit; 2019 Oct; 47(7):1245-1269. PubMed ID: 31102191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Optimal viewing position effects in the processing of isolated Chinese words.
Liu P; Li X
Vision Res; 2013 Apr; 81():45-57. PubMed ID: 23416868
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Contextual diversity is a main determinant of word identification times in young readers.
Perea M; Soares AP; Comesaña M
J Exp Child Psychol; 2013 Sep; 116(1):37-44. PubMed ID: 23374607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. A diffusion model account of normal and impaired readers.
Ratcliff R; Perea M; Colangelo A; Buchanan L
Brain Cogn; 2004 Jul; 55(2):374-82. PubMed ID: 15177817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
