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 *

170 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2632800)

  • 41. The Calgary semantic decision project: concrete/abstract decision data for 10,000 English words.
    Pexman PM; Heard A; Lloyd E; Yap MJ
    Behav Res Methods; 2017 Apr; 49(2):407-417. PubMed ID: 26944579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Automatic activation of phonological information in reading: evidence from the semantic relatedness decision task.
    Luo CR; Johnson RA; Gallo DA
    Mem Cognit; 1998 Jul; 26(4):833-43. PubMed ID: 9701974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. A database of orthography-semantics consistency (OSC) estimates for 15,017 English words.
    Marelli M; Amenta S
    Behav Res Methods; 2018 Aug; 50(4):1482-1495. PubMed ID: 29372490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. The effects of homonymy and polysemy on lexical access: an MEG study.
    Beretta A; Fiorentino R; Poeppel D
    Brain Res Cogn Brain Res; 2005 Jun; 24(1):57-65. PubMed ID: 15922158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Hemispheric asymmetries in the split-fovea model of semantic processing.
    Monaghan P; Shillcock R; McDonald S
    Brain Lang; 2004 Mar; 88(3):339-54. PubMed ID: 14967217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. The absoluteness of semantic processing: lessons from the analysis of temporal clusters in phonemic verbal fluency.
    Vonberg I; Ehlen F; Fromm O; Klostermann F
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(12):e115846. PubMed ID: 25535970
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Strength of discourse context as a determinant of the subordinate bias effect.
    Martin C; Vu H; Kellas G; Metcalf K
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 1999 Nov; 52(4):813-39. PubMed ID: 10660407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Evolution of word meanings through metaphorical mapping: Systematicity over the past millennium.
    Xu Y; Malt BC; Srinivasan M
    Cogn Psychol; 2017 Aug; 96():41-53. PubMed ID: 28601710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Remote semantic memory is impoverished in hippocampal amnesia.
    Klooster NB; Duff MC
    Neuropsychologia; 2015 Dec; 79(Pt A):42-52. PubMed ID: 26474741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Number of Meanings and Number of Senses: An ERP Study of Sublexical Ambiguities in Reading Chinese Disyllabic Compounds.
    Huang HW; Lee CY
    Front Psychol; 2018; 9():324. PubMed ID: 29651260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Semantic diversity accounts for the "missing" word frequency effect in stroke aphasia: insights using a novel method to quantify contextual variability in meaning.
    Hoffman P; Rogers TT; Ralph MA
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2011 Sep; 23(9):2432-46. PubMed ID: 21254804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Speakers' knowledge of word meanings: stable and perfect?
    Nagata H
    Percept Mot Skills; 2003 Oct; 97(2):427-34. PubMed ID: 14620229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. The effect of polysemy on lexical decision time: now you see it, now you don't.
    Millis ML; Button SB
    Mem Cognit; 1989 Mar; 17(2):141-7. PubMed ID: 2927312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Lexical factors in conceptual processes: The relationship between semantic representations and their corresponding phonological and orthographic lexical forms.
    Peleg O; Edelist L; Eviatar Z; Bergerbest D
    Mem Cognit; 2016 May; 44(4):519-37. PubMed ID: 26637339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Are lexical representations graded or discrete?
    Li L; Buxó-Lugo A; Jacobs CL; Slevc LR
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2024 May; 77(5):909-923. PubMed ID: 37382107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. On predicting form and meaning in a second language.
    Ito A; Martin AE; Nieuwland MS
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2017 Apr; 43(4):635-652. PubMed ID: 27668483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. The relatedness-of-meaning effect for ambiguous words in lexical-decision tasks: when does relatedness matter?
    Hino Y; Kusunose Y; Lupker SJ
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2010 Sep; 64(3):180-96. PubMed ID: 20873915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Semantic neighborhood effects on the recognition of ambiguous words.
    Locker L; Simpson GB; Yates M
    Mem Cognit; 2003 Jun; 31(4):505-15. PubMed ID: 12872867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. How Polysemy Affects Concreteness Ratings: The Case of Metaphor.
    Reijnierse WG; Burgers C; Bolognesi M; Krennmayr T
    Cogn Sci; 2019 Aug; 43(8):e12779. PubMed ID: 31446656
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Offline dominance and zeugmatic similarity normings of variably ambiguous words assessed against a neural language model (BERT).
    DeLong KA; Trott S; Kutas M
    Behav Res Methods; 2023 Jun; 55(4):1537-1557. PubMed ID: 35689168
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.