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 *

218 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24859839)

  • 21. Spaced learning enhances subsequent recognition memory by reducing neural repetition suppression.
    Xue G; Mei L; Chen C; Lu ZL; Poldrack R; Dong Q
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2011 Jul; 23(7):1624-33. PubMed ID: 20617892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. The phonological form of lexical items modulates the encoding of challenging second-language sound contrasts.
    Llompart M; Reinisch E
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2020 Aug; 46(8):1590-1610. PubMed ID: 32162959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Examining the causes of memory strength variability: recollection, attention failure, or encoding variability?
    Koen JD; Aly M; Wang WC; Yonelinas AP
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2013 Nov; 39(6):1726-41. PubMed ID: 23834057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Knowledge is power: Prior knowledge aids memory for both congruent and incongruent events, but in different ways.
    Greve A; Cooper E; Tibon R; Henson RN
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2019 Feb; 148(2):325-341. PubMed ID: 30394766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Animates are better remembered than inanimates: further evidence from word and picture stimuli.
    Bonin P; Gelin M; Bugaiska A
    Mem Cognit; 2014 Apr; 42(3):370-82. PubMed ID: 24078605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Working memory load dissociates contingency learning and item-specific proportion-congruent effects.
    Spinelli G; Krishna K; Perry JR; Lupker SJ
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2020 Nov; 46(11):2007-2033. PubMed ID: 32658541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The effect of shared distinctiveness on source memory: An event-related potential study.
    Weigl M; Pham HH; Mecklinger A; Rosburg T
    Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci; 2020 Oct; 20(5):1027-1040. PubMed ID: 32839959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Cingulo-opercular activity affects incidental memory encoding for speech in noise.
    Vaden KI; Teubner-Rhodes S; Ahlstrom JB; Dubno JR; Eckert MA
    Neuroimage; 2017 Aug; 157():381-387. PubMed ID: 28624645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Spatiotemporal pattern of brain electrical activity related to immediate and delayed episodic memory retrieval.
    Rivas-Fernández MÁ; Galdo-Álvarez S; Zurrón M; Díaz F; Lindín M
    Neurobiol Learn Mem; 2020 Nov; 175():107309. PubMed ID: 32890759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. When disfluency is--and is not--a desirable difficulty: the influence of typeface clarity on metacognitive judgments and memory.
    Yue CL; Castel AD; Bjork RA
    Mem Cognit; 2013 Feb; 41(2):229-41. PubMed ID: 22976883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Parametric effects of word frequency in memory for mixed frequency lists.
    Lohnas LJ; Kahana MJ
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2013 Nov; 39(6):1943-6. PubMed ID: 23834055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Self-referent encoding facilitates memory binding in young children: New insights into the self-reference effect in memory development.
    Andrews G; Murphy K; Dunbar M
    J Exp Child Psychol; 2020 Oct; 198():104919. PubMed ID: 32629234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Word predictability blurs the lines between production and comprehension: Evidence from the production effect in memory.
    Rommers J; Dell GS; Benjamin AS
    Cognition; 2020 May; 198():104206. PubMed ID: 32035323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Enhancing the production effect in memory.
    Quinlan CK; Taylor TL
    Memory; 2013; 21(8):904-15. PubMed ID: 23384885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The bilingual L2 advantage in recognition memory.
    Francis WS; Strobach EN
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2013 Dec; 20(6):1296-303. PubMed ID: 23606134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. The role of attention in the associative binding of emotionally arousing words.
    Maddox GB; Naveh-Benjamin M; Old S; Kilb A
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2012 Dec; 19(6):1128-34. PubMed ID: 23055140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Production improves memory equivalently following elaborative vs non-elaborative processing.
    Forrin ND; Jonker TR; MacLeod CM
    Memory; 2014; 22(5):470-80. PubMed ID: 23705973
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Production benefits both recollection and familiarity.
    Ozubko JD; Gopie N; MacLeod CM
    Mem Cognit; 2012 Apr; 40(3):326-38. PubMed ID: 22127849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. How does a threatening stimulus affect the memory of the display?
    Makovski T; Michael S; Chajut E
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2020 May; 73(5):676-687. PubMed ID: 31986981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Item-method directed forgetting: Effects at retrieval?
    Taylor TL; Cutmore L; Pries L
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2018 Feb; 183():116-123. PubMed ID: 29275948
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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