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 *

178 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24747873)

  • 21. Dissociating action-effect activation and effect-based response selection.
    Schwarz KA; Pfister R; Wirth R; Kunde W
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2018 Jul; 188():16-24. PubMed ID: 29807302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Locus of backward crosstalk effects on task 1 in a psychological refractory period task.
    Ko YT; Miller J
    Exp Psychol; 2014 Jan; 61(1):30-7. PubMed ID: 23948390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Processing two tasks with varying task order: central stage duration influences central processing order.
    Ruiz Fernández S; Leonhard T; Rolke B; Ulrich R
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2011 May; 137(1):10-7. PubMed ID: 21427007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Viewer perspective affects central bottleneck requirements in spatial translation tasks.
    Franz EA; Sebastian A; Hust C; Norris T
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2008 Apr; 34(2):398-412. PubMed ID: 18377178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Item-specific proportion congruency (ISPC) modulates, but does not generate, the backward crosstalk effect.
    Thomson SJ; Simone AC; Watter S
    Psychol Res; 2021 Apr; 85(3):1093-1107. PubMed ID: 32222869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. The Backward Crosstalk Effect Does Not Depend on the Degree of a Preceding Response Conflict.
    Schonard C; Ulrich R; Janczyk M
    Exp Psychol; 2020 Sep; 67(5):277-291. PubMed ID: 33167820
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Splitting of the P3 component during dual-task processing in a patient with posterior callosal section.
    Hesselmann G; Naccache L; Cohen L; Dehaene S
    Cortex; 2013 Mar; 49(3):730-47. PubMed ID: 22542264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Parallel and serial task processing in the PRP paradigm: a drift-diffusion model approach.
    Mattes A; Tavera F; Ophey A; Roheger M; Gaschler R; Haider H
    Psychol Res; 2021 Jun; 85(4):1529-1552. PubMed ID: 32335762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Dual-task performance with ideomotor-compatible tasks: is the central processing bottleneck intact, bypassed, or shifted in locus?
    Lien MC; McCann RS; Ruthruff E; Proctor RW
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2005 Feb; 31(1):122-44. PubMed ID: 15709868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. General cognitive ability and the psychological refractory period: individual differences in the mind's bottleneck.
    Lee JJ; Chabris CF
    Psychol Sci; 2013 Jul; 24(7):1226-33. PubMed ID: 23744874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The motor locus of no-go backward crosstalk.
    Durst M; Janczyk M
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2018 Dec; 44(12):1931-1946. PubMed ID: 29683705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Dual-task backward compatibility effects are episodically mediated.
    Giammarco M; Thomson SJ; Watter S
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2016 Feb; 78(2):520-41. PubMed ID: 26572914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. The source of execution-related dual-task interference: motor bottleneck or response monitoring?
    Bratzke D; Rolke B; Ulrich R
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2009 Oct; 35(5):1413-26. PubMed ID: 19803646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Probing the cortical network underlying the psychological refractory period: a combined EEG-fMRI study.
    Hesselmann G; Flandin G; Dehaene S
    Neuroimage; 2011 Jun; 56(3):1608-21. PubMed ID: 21397701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The role of the dorsal medial frontal cortex in central processing limitation: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study.
    Soutschek A; Taylor PC; Schubert T
    Exp Brain Res; 2016 Sep; 234(9):2447-55. PubMed ID: 27083589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Action-effect codes in and before the central bottleneck: evidence from the psychological refractory period paradigm.
    Paelecke M; Kunde W
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2007 Jun; 33(3):627-44. PubMed ID: 17563226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Parallel response selection disrupts sequence learning under dual-task conditions.
    Schumacher EH; Schwarb H
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2009 May; 138(2):270-90. PubMed ID: 19397384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Effects of a no-go Task 2 on Task 1 performance in dual - tasking: From benefits to costs.
    Janczyk M; Huestegge L
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2017 Apr; 79(3):796-806. PubMed ID: 28028775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Stopping while going! Response inhibition does not suffer dual-task interference.
    Yamaguchi M; Logan GD; Bissett PG
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2012 Feb; 38(1):123-34. PubMed ID: 21574740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Objects and events as determinants of parallel processing in dual tasks: evidence from the backward compatibility effect.
    Ellenbogen R; Meiran N
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2011 Feb; 37(1):152-67. PubMed ID: 20718573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.