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 *

148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26169949)

  • 21. Spatial S-R compatibility: positional instruction vs. compatibility instruction.
    Heister G; Schroeder-Heister P
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 1994 Feb; 85(1):15-24. PubMed ID: 8165921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Investigating grounded conceptualization: Stimulus-response compatibility for tool handles is due to spatial attention.
    Matheson HE; Thompson-Schill SL
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2019 Apr; 45(4):441-457. PubMed ID: 30816789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Vertically arrayed stimuli and responses: transfer of incompatible spatial mapping to Simon task occurs regardless of response-device orientation.
    Zhong Q; Xiong A; Vu KL; Proctor RW
    Exp Brain Res; 2018 Jan; 236(1):175-185. PubMed ID: 29103132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Flowers and spiders in spatial stimulus-response compatibility: does affective valence influence selection of task-sets or selection of responses?
    Yamaguchi M; Chen J; Mishler S; Proctor RW
    Cogn Emot; 2018 Aug; 32(5):1003-1017. PubMed ID: 28946804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Spatial perspective taking mediated by whole-body motor simulation.
    Muto H; Matsushita S; Morikawa K
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2018 Mar; 44(3):337-355. PubMed ID: 28795837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Neural mechanisms of spatial stimulus-response compatibility: the effect of crossed-hand position.
    Matsumoto E; Misaki M; Miyauchi S
    Exp Brain Res; 2004 Sep; 158(1):9-17. PubMed ID: 15029467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Right-left prevalence with task-irrelevant spatial codes.
    Rubichi S; Nicoletti R; Umiltà C
    Psychol Res; 2005 Jan; 69(3):167-78. PubMed ID: 15597182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Naïve and experienced judgments of stimulus-response compatibility: implications for interface design.
    Vu KP; Proctor RW
    Ergonomics; 2003 Jan; 46(1-3):169-87. PubMed ID: 12554405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Dissociation of S-R compatibility and Simon effects with mixed tasks and mappings.
    Proctor RW; Yamaguchi M; Dutt V; Gonzalez C
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2013 Apr; 39(2):593-609. PubMed ID: 22963231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Increased spatial salience in the social Simon task: a response-coding account of spatial compatibility effects.
    Dittrich K; Rothe A; Klauer KC
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2012 Jul; 74(5):911-29. PubMed ID: 22528612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The impact of horizontal and vertical Luminance SNARC compatibility on affective judgments.
    Gusmão B; Löffler CS; Topolinski S
    Cogn Emot; 2022 Dec; 36(8):1522-1530. PubMed ID: 36263873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Difference in stimulus-response compatibility effect in premotor and motor time between upper and lower limbs.
    Kato Y; Asami T
    Percept Mot Skills; 1998 Dec; 87(3 Pt 1):939-46. PubMed ID: 9885062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Stimulus-set location does not affect orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility.
    Cho YS; Proctor RW
    Psychol Res; 2004 Dec; 69(1-2):106-14. PubMed ID: 14634811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. No overall right-left prevalence for horizontal and vertical Simon effects.
    Vu KP; Pellicano A; Proctor RW
    Percept Psychophys; 2005 Jul; 67(5):929-38. PubMed ID: 16334063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Tracking and discrete dual task performance with different spatial stimulus-response mappings.
    Tsang SN; Chan AH
    Ergonomics; 2015; 58(3):368-82. PubMed ID: 25396283
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Influences of multiple spatial stimulus and response codes on orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility.
    Cho YS; Proctor RW
    Percept Psychophys; 2004 Aug; 66(6):1003-17. PubMed ID: 15675647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Effects of precuing horizontal and vertical dimensions on right-left prevalence.
    Proctor RW; Koch I; Vu KP
    Mem Cognit; 2006 Jun; 34(4):949-58. PubMed ID: 17063924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Mixing compatible and incompatible mappings: elimination, reduction, and enhancement of spatial compatibility effects.
    Vu KP; Proctor RW
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2004 Apr; 57(3):539-56. PubMed ID: 15204140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Trajectory deviations in spatial compatibility tasks with peripheral and central stimuli.
    Welsh TN; Pacione SM; Neyedli HF; Ray M; Ou J
    Psychol Res; 2015 Jul; 79(4):650-7. PubMed ID: 25009311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Stimulus-response compatibility for mixed mappings and tasks with unique responses.
    Proctor RW; Vu KP
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2010 Feb; 63(2):320-40. PubMed ID: 19526436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.