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 *

204 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23638070)

  • 21. Attentional control adjustments in Eriksen and Stroop task performance can be independent of response conflict.
    Lamers MJ; Roelofs A
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2011 Jun; 64(6):1056-81. PubMed ID: 21113864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Proactive and reactive processes in the medial frontal cortex: an electrophysiological study.
    Oliveira FT; Hickey C; McDonald JJ
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(1):e84351. PubMed ID: 24404160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Resisting distraction and response inhibition trigger similar enhancements of future performance.
    Bissett PG; Grant LD; Weissman DH
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2017 Oct; 180():40-51. PubMed ID: 28843207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Hypo-activity of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex relates to increased reaction time variability in patients with schizophrenia.
    Panagiotaropoulou G; Thrapsanioti E; Pappa E; Grigoras C; Mylonas D; Karavasilis E; Velonakis G; Kelekis N; Smyrnis N
    Neuroimage Clin; 2019; 23():101853. PubMed ID: 31096180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Event-related potential indices of congruency sequence effects without feature integration or contingency learning confounds.
    Larson MJ; Clayson PE; Kirwan CB; Weissman DH
    Psychophysiology; 2016 Jun; 53(6):814-22. PubMed ID: 26854028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Congruency sequence effect in cross-task context: evidence for dimension-specific modulation.
    Lee J; Cho YS
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2013 Nov; 144(3):617-27. PubMed ID: 24184348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Orchestrating Proactive and Reactive Mechanisms for Filtering Distracting Information: Brain-Behavior Relationships Revealed by a Mixed-Design fMRI Study.
    Marini F; Demeter E; Roberts KC; Chelazzi L; Woldorff MG
    J Neurosci; 2016 Jan; 36(3):988-1000. PubMed ID: 26791226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Modeling conflict and error in the medial frontal cortex.
    Mayer AR; Teshiba TM; Franco AR; Ling J; Shane MS; Stephen JM; Jung RE
    Hum Brain Mapp; 2012 Dec; 33(12):2843-55. PubMed ID: 21976411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Different mechanisms can account for the instruction induced proportion congruency effect.
    Desender K
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2018 Mar; 184():39-45. PubMed ID: 28366273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Development of Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex Function in Pediatric Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.
    Fitzgerald KD; Liu Y; Johnson TD; Moser JS; Marsh R; Hanna GL; Taylor SF
    J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry; 2018 Jun; 57(6):397-406. PubMed ID: 29859555
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Finding an interaction between Stroop congruency and flanker congruency requires a large congruency effect: A within-trial combination of conflict tasks.
    Rey-Mermet A
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2020 Jul; 82(5):2271-2301. PubMed ID: 31974936
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The congruency sequence effect 3.0: a critical test of conflict adaptation.
    Duthoo W; Abrahamse EL; Braem S; Boehler CN; Notebaert W
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(10):e110462. PubMed ID: 25340396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Functional connectivity during Stroop task performance.
    Harrison BJ; Shaw M; Yücel M; Purcell R; Brewer WJ; Strother SC; Egan GF; Olver JS; Nathan PJ; Pantelis C
    Neuroimage; 2005 Jan; 24(1):181-91. PubMed ID: 15588609
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Motivation by potential gains and losses affects control processes via different mechanisms in the attentional network.
    Paschke LM; Walter H; Steimke R; Ludwig VU; Gaschler R; Schubert T; Stelzel C
    Neuroimage; 2015 May; 111():549-61. PubMed ID: 25731995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A diffusion model for the congruency sequence effect.
    Luo C; Proctor RW
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2022 Dec; 29(6):2034-2051. PubMed ID: 35676612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Common and specific neural correlates underlying the spatial congruency effect induced by the egocentric and allocentric reference frame.
    Liu N; Li H; Su W; Chen Q
    Hum Brain Mapp; 2017 Apr; 38(4):2112-2127. PubMed ID: 28054740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Conflict background triggered congruency sequence effects in graphic judgment task.
    Zhao L; Wang Y
    PLoS One; 2013; 8(1):e54780. PubMed ID: 23372766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Interacting congruency effects in the hybrid Stroop-Simon task prevent conclusions regarding the domain specificity or generality of the congruency sequence effect.
    Weissman DH
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2020 May; 46(5):945-967. PubMed ID: 31580121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The Right Superior Frontal Gyrus and Individual Variation in Proactive Control of Impulsive Response.
    Hu S; Ide JS; Zhang S; Li CR
    J Neurosci; 2016 Dec; 36(50):12688-12696. PubMed ID: 27974616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Neural time course of conflict adaptation effects on the Stroop task.
    Larson MJ; Kaufman DA; Perlstein WM
    Neuropsychologia; 2009 Feb; 47(3):663-70. PubMed ID: 19071142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.