206 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24697668)
1. Measuring effects of voluntary attention: a comparison among predictive arrow, colour, and number cues.
Olk B; Tsankova E; Petca AR; Wilhelm AF
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2014 Oct; 67(10):2025-41. PubMed ID: 24697668
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Attention and ageing: Measuring effects of involuntary and voluntary orienting in isolation and in combination.
Olk B; Kingstone A
Br J Psychol; 2015 May; 106(2):235-52. PubMed ID: 25040206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Attention to arrows: pointing to a new direction.
Ristic J; Kingstone A
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2006 Nov; 59(11):1921-30. PubMed ID: 16987781
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Visuospatial attention is guided by both the symbolic value and the spatial proximity of selected arrows.
Pratt J; Radulescu P; Guo RM; Hommel B
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2010 Oct; 36(5):1321-4. PubMed ID: 20873941
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Attentional orienting induced by arrows and eye-gaze compared with an endogenous cue.
Brignani D; Guzzon D; Marzi CA; Miniussi C
Neuropsychologia; 2009 Jan; 47(2):370-81. PubMed ID: 18926835
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. How do selected arrows guide visuospatial attention? Dissociating symbolic value and spatial proximity.
Leblanc E; Jolicoeur P
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2010 Oct; 36(5):1314-20. PubMed ID: 20873940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Orienting of attention with eye and arrow cues and the effect of overtraining.
Guzzon D; Brignani D; Miniussi C; Marzi CA
Acta Psychol (Amst); 2010 Jul; 134(3):353-62. PubMed ID: 20421095
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A configural dominant account of contextual cueing: Configural cues are stronger than colour cues.
Kunar MA; John R; Sweetman H
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2014; 67(7):1366-82. PubMed ID: 24199842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The functional role of alternation advantage in the sequence effect of symbolic cueing with nonpredictive arrow cues.
Qian Q; Song M; Shinomori K; Wang F
Atten Percept Psychophys; 2012 Oct; 74(7):1430-6. PubMed ID: 22718205
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Which way is which? Examining global/local processing with symbolic cues.
Mills M; Dodd MD
J Exp Psychol Gen; 2014 Aug; 143(4):1429-36. PubMed ID: 24684258
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Eye gaze versus arrows as spatial cues: two qualitatively different modes of attentional selection.
Marotta A; Lupiáñez J; Martella D; Casagrande M
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2012 Apr; 38(2):326-35. PubMed ID: 21688940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Sequence effects of the involuntary and the voluntary components of symbolic cueing.
Qian Q; Wang F; Song M; Feng Y; Shinomori K
Atten Percept Psychophys; 2018 Apr; 80(3):662-668. PubMed ID: 29280048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Self make-up: the influence of self-referential processing on attention orienting.
Zhao S; Uono S; Yoshimura S; Toichi M
Sci Rep; 2015 Sep; 5():14169. PubMed ID: 26391177
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Trial-by-trial modulations in the orienting of attention elicited by gaze and arrow cues.
Ciardo F; Ricciardelli P; Iani C
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2019 Mar; 72(3):543-556. PubMed ID: 29589789
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The cued recognition task: dissociating the abrupt onset effect from the social and arrow cueing effect.
Xu B; Tanaka JW
Atten Percept Psychophys; 2015 Jan; 77(1):97-110. PubMed ID: 25190323
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Lateralized ERP components related to spatial orienting: discriminating the direction of attention from processing sensory aspects of the cue.
Jongen EM; Smulders FT; Van der Heiden JS
Psychophysiology; 2007 Nov; 44(6):968-86. PubMed ID: 17617171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Cognitive control in cued task switching with transition cues: cue processing, task processing, and cue-task transition congruency.
Van Loy B; Liefooghe B; Vandierendonck A
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2010 Oct; 63(10):1916-35. PubMed ID: 20574933
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Implicit attentional orienting in a target detection task with central cues.
Peterson SA; Gibson TN
Conscious Cogn; 2011 Dec; 20(4):1532-47. PubMed ID: 21807536
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
