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 *

115 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25004846)

  • 1. The preference of probability over negative values in action selection.
    Neyedli HF; Welsh TN
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2015; 68(2):261-83. PubMed ID: 25004846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Choices in a key press decision-making task are more optimal after gaining both aiming and reward experience.
    Manzone JX; Taravati S; Neyedli HF; Welsh TN
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2020 Dec; 73(12):2197-2216. PubMed ID: 32567514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Optimal weighting of costs and probabilities in a risky motor decision-making task requires experience.
    Neyedli HF; Welsh TN
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2013 Jun; 39(3):638-45. PubMed ID: 23163791
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. People are better at maximizing expected gain in a manual aiming task with rapidly changing probabilities than with rapidly changing payoffs.
    Neyedli HF; Welsh TN
    J Neurophysiol; 2014 Mar; 111(5):1016-26. PubMed ID: 24335221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Are perceptuo-motor decisions really more optimal than cognitive decisions?
    Jarvstad A; Hahn U; Warren PA; Rushton SK
    Cognition; 2014 Mar; 130(3):397-416. PubMed ID: 24413063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Decisions under risk in Parkinson's disease: preserved evaluation of probability and magnitude.
    Sharp ME; Viswanathan J; McKeown MJ; Appel-Cresswell S; Stoessl AJ; Barton JJ
    Neuropsychologia; 2013 Nov; 51(13):2679-89. PubMed ID: 23954375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Prospect evaluation as a function of numeracy and probability denominator.
    Millroth P; Juslin P
    Cognition; 2015 May; 138():1-9. PubMed ID: 25704578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Sensitivity and bias in decision-making under risk: evaluating the perception of reward, its probability and value.
    Sharp ME; Viswanathan J; Lanyon LJ; Barton JJ
    PLoS One; 2012; 7(4):e33460. PubMed ID: 22493669
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Biases and optimality of sensory-motor and cognitive decisions.
    Trommershäuser J
    Prog Brain Res; 2009; 174():267-78. PubMed ID: 19477345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Preference reversals are diminished when gambles are presented as relative frequencies.
    Tunney RJ
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2006 Sep; 59(9):1516-23. PubMed ID: 16873105
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Anterior cingulate activity modulates nonlinear decision weight function of uncertain prospects.
    Paulus MP; Frank LR
    Neuroimage; 2006 Apr; 30(2):668-77. PubMed ID: 16321546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effects of salience and reward information during saccadic decisions under risk.
    Stritzke M; Trommershäuser J; Gegenfurtner KR
    J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis; 2009 Nov; 26(11):B1-13. PubMed ID: 19884911
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The influence of probability format on elicited certainty equivalents.
    Noussair CN; Vogt B
    Prog Brain Res; 2013; 202():151-71. PubMed ID: 23317831
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Executive functions, categorization of probabilities, and learning from feedback: what does really matter for decision making under explicit risk conditions?
    Schiebener J; Zamarian L; Delazer M; Brand M
    J Clin Exp Neuropsychol; 2011 Nov; 33(9):1025-39. PubMed ID: 22082084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. We infer rather than perceive the moment we decided to act.
    Banks WP; Isham EA
    Psychol Sci; 2009 Jan; 20(1):17-21. PubMed ID: 19152537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Electrophysiological correlates of hypothesis evaluation: revealed with a modified Wason's selection task.
    Cai X; Li F; Wang Y; Jackson T; Chen J; Zhang L; Li H
    Brain Res; 2011 Aug; 1408():17-26. PubMed ID: 21774918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Modulation of antisaccade costs through manipulation of target-location probability: only under decisional uncertainty.
    Jóhannesson ÓI; Haraldsson HM; Kristjánsson Á
    Vision Res; 2013 Dec; 93():62-73. PubMed ID: 24148874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Exaggerated risk: prospect theory and probability weighting in risky choice.
    Kusev P; van Schaik P; Ayton P; Dent J; Chater N
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2009 Nov; 35(6):1487-505. PubMed ID: 19857019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The effect of visual signals on spatial decision making.
    Danziger S; Rafal R
    Cognition; 2009 Feb; 110(2):182-97. PubMed ID: 19121825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effect of feedback mode and task difficulty on quality of timing decisions in a zero-sum game.
    Tikuisis P; Vartanian O; Mandel DR
    Hum Factors; 2014 Sep; 56(6):1062-76. PubMed ID: 25277017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.