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 *

376 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25917247)

  • 1. Functional characteristics of control adaptation in intermodal sensory processing.
    Melcher T; Pfister R; Busmann M; Schlüter MC; Leyhe T; Gruber O
    Brain Cogn; 2015 Jun; 96():43-55. PubMed ID: 25917247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Shifts in target modality cause attentional reset: Evidence from sequential modulation of crossmodal congruency effects.
    Kreutzfeldt M; Stephan DN; Willmes K; Koch I
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2016 Oct; 23(5):1466-1473. PubMed ID: 26813694
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Distinct effects of trial-driven and task Set-related control in primary visual cortex.
    Griffis JC; Elkhetali AS; Vaden RJ; Visscher KM
    Neuroimage; 2015 Oct; 120():285-297. PubMed ID: 26163806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Contextual within-trial adaptation of cognitive control: Evidence from the combination of conflict tasks.
    Rey-Mermet A; Gade M
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2016 Oct; 42(10):1505-32. PubMed ID: 27149295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Cognitive control during a spatial Stroop task: Comparing conflict monitoring and prediction of response-outcome theories.
    Pires L; Leitão J; Guerrini C; Simões MR
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2018 Sep; 189():63-75. PubMed ID: 28683927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Contingent attentional capture triggers the congruency sequence effect.
    Schmidt JR; Weissman DH
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2015 Jul; 159():61-8. PubMed ID: 26036421
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Distinct cognitive control mechanisms as revealed by modality-specific conflict adaptation effects.
    Yang G; Nan W; Zheng Y; Wu H; Li Q; Liu X
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2017 Apr; 43(4):807-818. PubMed ID: 28345947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Rapid adaptive adjustments of selective attention following errors revealed by the time course of steady-state visual evoked potentials.
    Steinhauser M; Andersen SK
    Neuroimage; 2019 Feb; 186():83-92. PubMed ID: 30366075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effector system-specific sequential modulations of congruency effects.
    Janczyk M; Leuthold H
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2018 Jun; 25(3):1066-1072. PubMed ID: 28608004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Context-specific proportion congruent effects: Compound-cue contingency learning in disguise.
    Schmidt JR; Lemercier C
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2019 May; 72(5):1119-1130. PubMed ID: 29926760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Attentional control of response selection in task switching.
    Schneider DW
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2015 Oct; 41(5):1315-24. PubMed ID: 26076177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The contribution of response conflict, multisensory integration, and body-mediated attention to the crossmodal congruency effect.
    Marini F; Romano D; Maravita A
    Exp Brain Res; 2017 Mar; 235(3):873-887. PubMed ID: 27913817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Now you see it, now you don't: controlling for contingencies and stimulus repetitions eliminates the Gratton effect.
    Schmidt JR; De Houwer J
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2011 Sep; 138(1):176-86. PubMed ID: 21745649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Isolating the neural mechanisms of interference during continuous multisensory dual-task performance.
    Kasper RW; Cecotti H; Touryan J; Eckstein MP; Giesbrecht B
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2014 Mar; 26(3):476-89. PubMed ID: 24047391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The interaction between emotion and executive control: Comparison between visual, auditory, and tactile modalities.
    Fruchtman-Steinbok T; Salzer Y; Henik A; Cohen N
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2017 Aug; 70(8):1661-1674. PubMed ID: 27295071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Adaptation to conflict frequency without contingency and temporal learning: Evidence from the picture-word interference task.
    Spinelli G; Perry JR; Lupker SJ
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2019 Aug; 45(8):995-1014. PubMed ID: 31144859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Increased visual task difficulty enhances attentional capture by both visual and auditory distractor stimuli.
    Sugimoto F; Katayama J
    Brain Res; 2017 Jun; 1664():55-62. PubMed ID: 28377160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Item-specific control of attention in the Stroop task: Contingency learning is not the whole story in the item-specific proportion-congruent effect.
    Spinelli G; Lupker SJ
    Mem Cognit; 2020 Apr; 48(3):426-435. PubMed ID: 31705394
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The dynamics of cognitive control: evidence for within-trial conflict adaptation from frequency-tagged EEG.
    Scherbaum S; Fischer R; Dshemuchadse M; Goschke T
    Psychophysiology; 2011 May; 48(5):591-600. PubMed ID: 21044093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Task sets serve as boundaries for the congruency sequence effect.
    Grant LD; Cookson SL; Weissman DH
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2020 Aug; 46(8):798-812. PubMed ID: 32324028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 19.