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 *

120 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24594000)

  • 1. Surface-based constraints on target selection and distractor rejection: evidence from preview search.
    Dent K; Humphreys GW; He X; Braithwaite JJ
    Vision Res; 2014 Apr; 97():89-99. PubMed ID: 24594000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Integrating space and time in visual search: how the preview benefit is modulated by stereoscopic depth.
    Dent K; Braithwaite JJ; He X; Humphreys GW
    Vision Res; 2012 Jul; 65():45-61. PubMed ID: 22728923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Flexible feature-based inhibition in visual search mediates magnified impairments of selection: evidence from carry-over effects under dynamic preview-search conditions.
    Andrews LS; Watson DG; Humphreys GW; Braithwaite JJ
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2011 Aug; 37(4):1007-16. PubMed ID: 21553995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Onset of background dynamic noise attenuates preview benefit in inefficient visual search.
    Osugi T; Murakami I
    Vision Res; 2015 Jul; 112():33-44. PubMed ID: 25976299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Perceptual grouping constrains inhibition in time-based visual selection.
    Zupan Z; Watson DG
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2020 Feb; 82(2):500-517. PubMed ID: 31875319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Selection of new objects by onset capture and visual marking.
    Osugi T; Hayashi D; Murakami I
    Vision Res; 2016 May; 122():21-33. PubMed ID: 27001341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. An onset advantage without a preview benefit: neuropsychological evidence separating onset and preview effects in search.
    Humphreys GW; Olivers CN; Yoon EY
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2006 Jan; 18(1):110-20. PubMed ID: 16417687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A singleton distractor updates the inhibitory template for visual marking.
    Yamauchi K; Kawahara JI
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2019 Jan; 192():200-211. PubMed ID: 30530171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. No previews are good news: using preview search to probe categorical grouping for orientation.
    Hodsoll JP; Humphreys GW
    Vision Res; 2007 May; 47(11):1464-78. PubMed ID: 17433399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Visuospatial working memory mediates inhibitory and facilitatory guidance in preview search.
    Barrett DJ; Shimozaki SS; Jensen S; Zobay O
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2016 Oct; 42(10):1533-46. PubMed ID: 27195768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Does previewing one stimulus feature help conjunction search?
    Olds ES; Fockler KA
    Perception; 2004; 33(2):195-216. PubMed ID: 15109162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effects of colour on preview search: anticipatory and inhibitory biases for colour.
    Braithwaite JJ; Humphreys GW; Hodsoll J
    Spat Vis; 2004; 17(4-5):389-415. PubMed ID: 15559111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Temporal Binding and Segmentation in Visual Search: A Computational Neuroscience Analysis.
    Mavritsaki E; Humphreys G
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2016 Oct; 28(10):1553-67. PubMed ID: 27243617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Visual working memory supports the inhibition of previously processed information: evidence from preview search.
    Al-Aidroos N; Emrich SM; Ferber S; Pratt J
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2012 Jun; 38(3):643-63. PubMed ID: 21988363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Electrophysiological correlates of active suppression and attentional selection in preview visual search.
    Berggren N; Eimer M
    Neuropsychologia; 2018 Nov; 120():75-85. PubMed ID: 30359651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Visual attention to surfaces in three-dimensional space.
    He ZJ; Nakayama K
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 1995 Nov; 92(24):11155-9. PubMed ID: 7479956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The influence of relevant and irrelevant stereoscopic depth cues: Depth information does not always capture attention.
    Plewan T; Rinkenauer G
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2018 Nov; 80(8):1996-2007. PubMed ID: 30030691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Object-based inhibitory priming in preview search: evidence from the "top-up" procedure.
    Kunar MA; Humphreys GW
    Mem Cognit; 2006 Apr; 34(3):459-74. PubMed ID: 16933757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Spatiotemporal segregation in visual search: evidence from parietal lesions.
    Olivers CN; Humphreys GW
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2004 Aug; 30(4):667-88. PubMed ID: 15301617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Dynamics of attention in depth: evidence from multi-element tracking.
    Viswanathan L; Mingolla E
    Perception; 2002; 31(12):1415-37. PubMed ID: 12916667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.