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 *

156 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26169949)

  • 1. Control-display alignment determines the prevalent compatibility effect in two-dimensional stimulus-response tasks.
    Lee S; Miles JD; Vu KP
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2016 Apr; 23(2):571-8. PubMed ID: 26169949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Determinants of right-left and top-bottom prevalence for two-dimensional spatial compatibility.
    Vu KP; Proctor RW
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2001 Aug; 27(4):813-28. PubMed ID: 11518145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The prevalence effect in two-dimensional stimulus-response compatibility is a function of the relative salience of the dimensions.
    Vu KP; Proctor RW
    Percept Psychophys; 2002 Jul; 64(5):815-28. PubMed ID: 12201340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Vertical versus horizontal spatial compatibility: right-left prevalence with bimanual responses.
    Vu KP; Proctor RW; Pick DF
    Psychol Res; 2000; 64(1):25-40. PubMed ID: 11109865
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Influence of auditory and audiovisual stimuli on the right-left prevalence effect.
    Vu KP; Minakata K; Ngo MK
    Psychol Res; 2014; 78(3):400-10. PubMed ID: 24096315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effects of visual cue and response assignment on spatial stimulus coding in stimulus-response compatibility.
    Nishimura A; Yokosawa K
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2012; 65(1):55-72. PubMed ID: 21939367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Brain-behavior relationships: evidence from practice effects in spatial stimulus-response compatibility.
    Iacoboni M; Woods RP; Mazziotta JC
    J Neurophysiol; 1996 Jul; 76(1):321-31. PubMed ID: 8836228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. No prevalence of right-left over top-bottom spatial codes.
    Hommel B
    Percept Psychophys; 1996 Jan; 58(1):102-10. PubMed ID: 8668511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Influence of short incompatible practice on the Simon effect: transfer along the vertical dimension and across vertical and horizontal dimensions.
    Conde EF; Fraga-Filho RS; Lameira AP; Mograbi DC; Riggio L; Gawryszewski LG
    Exp Brain Res; 2015 Nov; 233(11):3313-21. PubMed ID: 26265123
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Do silhouettes and photographs produce fundamentally different object-based correspondence effects?
    Proctor RW; Lien MC; Thompson L
    Cognition; 2017 Dec; 169():91-101. PubMed ID: 28865287
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Right-left prevalence effect with horizontal and vertical effectors.
    Rubichi S; Nicoletti R; Pelosi A; Umiltà C
    Percept Psychophys; 2004 Feb; 66(2):255-63. PubMed ID: 15129747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Representing response position relative to display location: influence on orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility.
    Cho YS; Proctor RW
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2005 Jul; 58(5):839-64. PubMed ID: 16194938
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Explicit spatial compatibility is not critical to the object handle effect.
    Saccone EJ; Churches O; Nicholls ME
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2016 Oct; 42(10):1643-53. PubMed ID: 27668425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Object affordance and spatial-compatibility effects in Parkinson's disease.
    Galpin A; Tipper SP; Dick JP; Poliakoff E
    Cortex; 2011 Mar; 47(3):332-41. PubMed ID: 20189167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Stimulus-Response and Response-Effect Compatibility With Touchless Gestures and Moving Action Effects.
    Janczyk M; Xiong A; Proctor RW
    Hum Factors; 2019 Dec; 61(8):1297-1314. PubMed ID: 30844314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Dissociating affordance and spatial compatibility effects using a pantomimed reaching action.
    Couth S; Gowen E; Poliakoff E
    Exp Brain Res; 2014 Mar; 232(3):855-64. PubMed ID: 24337351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility effects emerge even when the stimulus position is task irrelevant.
    Nishimura A; Yokosawa K
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2006 Jun; 59(6):1021-32. PubMed ID: 16885141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Is automatic imitation a specialized form of stimulus-response compatibility? Dissociating imitative and spatial compatibilities.
    Boyer TW; Longo MR; Bertenthal BI
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2012 Mar; 139(3):440-8. PubMed ID: 22326448
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Spatial stimulus response compatibility for a horizontal visual display with hand and foot controls.
    Chan KW; Chan AH
    Ergonomics; 2011 Mar; 54(3):233-45. PubMed ID: 21390953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The ups and downs (and lefts and rights) of synaesthetic number forms: validation from spatial cueing and SNARC-type tasks.
    Jarick M; Dixon MJ; Maxwell EC; Nicholls ME; Smilek D
    Cortex; 2009; 45(10):1190-9. PubMed ID: 19660746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.