BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

184 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24337415)

  • 1. The representation of conceptual knowledge: visual, auditory, and olfactory imagery compared with semantic processing.
    Palmiero M; Di Matteo R; Belardinelli MO
    Cogn Process; 2014 May; 15(2):143-57. PubMed ID: 24337415
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Imagery and retrieval of auditory and visual information: neural correlates of successful and unsuccessful performance.
    Huijbers W; Pennartz CM; Rubin DC; Daselaar SM
    Neuropsychologia; 2011 Jun; 49(7):1730-40. PubMed ID: 21396384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Imagining Sounds and Images: Decoding the Contribution of Unimodal and Transmodal Brain Regions to Semantic Retrieval in the Absence of Meaningful Input.
    Murphy C; Rueschemeyer SA; Smallwood J; Jefferies E
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2019 Nov; 31(11):1599-1616. PubMed ID: 30156502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Externalization Errors of Olfactory Source Monitoring in Healthy Controls-An fMRI Study.
    Leclerc MP; Kellermann T; Freiherr J; Clemens B; Habel U; Regenbogen C
    Chem Senses; 2019 Oct; 44(8):593-606. PubMed ID: 31414135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Colavita dominance effect revisited: the effect of semantic congruity.
    Stubblefield A; Jacobs LA; Kim Y; Goolkasian P
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2013 Nov; 75(8):1827-39. PubMed ID: 23943499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparing perceptual category learning across modalities in the same individuals.
    Roark CL; Paulon G; Sarkar A; Chandrasekaran B
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2021 Jun; 28(3):898-909. PubMed ID: 33532985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Olfactory imagery and repetition priming: The effect of odor naming and imagery ability.
    Tomiczek C; Stevenson RJ
    Exp Psychol; 2009; 56(6):397-408. PubMed ID: 19502201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Synaesthesia or vivid imagery? A single case fMRI study of visually induced olfactory perception.
    Chan JS; van den Bosch JJ; Theves S; Hardt S; Pflanz P; Lötsch J; Kaiser J; Naumer MJ
    Multisens Res; 2014; 27(3-4):225-46. PubMed ID: 25577904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Cross-modal representations in early visual and auditory cortices revealed by multi-voxel pattern analysis.
    Gu J; Liu B; Li X; Wang P; Wang B
    Brain Imaging Behav; 2020 Oct; 14(5):1908-1920. PubMed ID: 31183774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The fate of the inner nose: odor imagery in patients with olfactory loss.
    Flohr EL; Arshamian A; Wieser MJ; Hummel C; Larsson M; Mühlberger A; Hummel T
    Neuroscience; 2014 May; 268():118-27. PubMed ID: 24657459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Auditory-olfactory synesthesia coexisting with auditory-visual synesthesia.
    Jackson TE; Sandramouli S
    J Neuroophthalmol; 2012 Sep; 32(3):221-3. PubMed ID: 22772879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Semantics of the Visual Environment Encoded in Parahippocampal Cortex.
    Bonner MF; Price AR; Peelle JE; Grossman M
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2016 Mar; 28(3):361-78. PubMed ID: 26679216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Brain networks underlying mental imagery of auditory and visual information.
    Zvyagintsev M; Clemens B; Chechko N; Mathiak KA; Sack AT; Mathiak K
    Eur J Neurosci; 2013 May; 37(9):1421-34. PubMed ID: 23383863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. I can see what you are saying: Auditory labels reduce visual search times.
    Cho KW
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2016 Oct; 170():19-31. PubMed ID: 27341509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Voluntary control of semantic neural representations by imagery with conflicting visual stimulation.
    Fukuma R; Yanagisawa T; Nishimoto S; Sugano H; Tamura K; Yamamoto S; Iimura Y; Fujita Y; Oshino S; Tani N; Koide-Majima N; Kamitani Y; Kishima H
    Commun Biol; 2022 Mar; 5(1):214. PubMed ID: 35304588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. On the influence of typicality and age of acquisition on semantic processing: Diverging evidence from behavioural and ERP responses.
    Räling R; Holzgrefe-Lang J; Schröder A; Wartenburger I
    Neuropsychologia; 2015 Aug; 75():186-200. PubMed ID: 26032580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Self-grounding visual, auditory and olfactory autobiographical memories.
    Knez I; Ljunglöf L; Arshamian A; Willander J
    Conscious Cogn; 2017 Jul; 52():1-8. PubMed ID: 28448791
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Reading visually embodied meaning from the brain: Visually grounded computational models decode visual-object mental imagery induced by written text.
    Anderson AJ; Bruni E; Lopopolo A; Poesio M; Baroni M
    Neuroimage; 2015 Oct; 120():309-22. PubMed ID: 26188260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Different visual and auditory latencies affect cross-modal non-spatial repetition inhibition.
    Wu X; Wang A; Tang X; Zhang M
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2019 Sep; 200():102940. PubMed ID: 31665621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Electrophysiological evidence for a shared representational medium for visual images and visual percepts.
    Farah MJ; Péronnet F; Gonon MA; Giard MH
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 1988 Sep; 117(3):248-57. PubMed ID: 2971761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.