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 *

138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26408864)

  • 1. Dot comparison stimuli are not all alike: the effect of different visual controls on ANS measurement.
    Clayton S; Gilmore C; Inglis M
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2015 Oct; 161():177-84. PubMed ID: 26408864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The measurement of approximate number system acuity across the lifespan is compromised by congruency effects.
    Norris JE; Clayton S; Gilmore C; Inglis M; Castronovo J
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2019 May; 72(5):1037-1046. PubMed ID: 29747553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Congruency effects in dot comparison tasks: convex hull is more important than dot area.
    Gilmore C; Cragg L; Hogan G; Inglis M
    J Cogn Psychol (Hove); 2016 Nov; 28(8):923-931. PubMed ID: 28163886
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Developmental differences in approaches to nonsymbolic comparison tasks.
    Clayton S; Inglis M; Gilmore C
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2019 Mar; 72(3):436-445. PubMed ID: 29419356
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The effect of visual parameters on neural activation during nonsymbolic number comparison and its relation to math competency.
    Wilkey ED; Barone JC; Mazzocco MMM; Vogel SE; Price GR
    Neuroimage; 2017 Oct; 159():430-442. PubMed ID: 28801254
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. How to estimate how well people estimate: evaluating measures of individual differences in the approximate number system.
    Chesney D; Bjalkebring P; Peters E
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2015 Nov; 77(8):2781-802. PubMed ID: 26335207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Nonsymbolic numerical magnitude comparison: reliability and validity of different task variants and outcome measures, and their relationship to arithmetic achievement in adults.
    Price GR; Palmer D; Battista C; Ansari D
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2012 May; 140(1):50-7. PubMed ID: 22445770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Modeling the approximate number system to quantify the contribution of visual stimulus features.
    DeWind NK; Adams GK; Platt ML; Brannon EM
    Cognition; 2015 Sep; 142():247-65. PubMed ID: 26056747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Mutual influences between numerical and non-numerical quantities in comparison tasks.
    Hendryckx C; Guillaume M; Beuel A; Van Rinsveld A; Content A
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2021 May; 74(5):843-852. PubMed ID: 33283654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. To what extent is dot comparison an appropriate measure of approximate number system?
    Rodríguez C; Ferreira RA
    Front Psychol; 2022; 13():1065600. PubMed ID: 36704683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Numerosities and space; indeed a cognitive illusion! A reply to de Hevia and Spelke (2009).
    Gebuis T; Gevers W
    Cognition; 2011 Nov; 121(2):248-52; discussion 253-5. PubMed ID: 21570067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The role of numerical and non-numerical cues in nonsymbolic number processing: Evidence from the line bisection task.
    Cleland AA; Bull R
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2015; 68(9):1844-59. PubMed ID: 25495403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Looking for more food or more people? Task context influences basic numerosity perception.
    Fornaciai M; Farrell A; Park J
    Cortex; 2019 May; 114():67-75. PubMed ID: 30032863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Indexing the approximate number system.
    Inglis M; Gilmore C
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2014 Jan; 145():147-55. PubMed ID: 24361686
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Reliability and Validity of Nonsymbolic and Symbolic Comparison Tasks in School-Aged Children.
    Castro D; Estévez N; Gómez D; Dartnell PR
    Span J Psychol; 2017 Dec; 20():E75. PubMed ID: 29199626
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The mental representation of the magnitude of symbolic and nonsymbolic ratios in adults.
    Meert G; Grégoire J; Seron X; Noël MP
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2012; 65(4):702-24. PubMed ID: 22217316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Assessing the Approximate Number System: no relation between numerical comparison and estimation tasks.
    Guillaume M; Gevers W; Content A
    Psychol Res; 2016 Mar; 80(2):248-58. PubMed ID: 25742706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The interplay between nonsymbolic number and its continuous visual properties.
    Gebuis T; Reynvoet B
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2012 Nov; 141(4):642-8. PubMed ID: 22082115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The effect of visual parameters on nonsymbolic numerosity estimation varies depending on the format of stimulus presentation.
    Kuzmina Y; Malykh S
    J Exp Child Psychol; 2022 Dec; 224():105514. PubMed ID: 35917760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparing performance in discrete and continuous comparison tasks.
    Leibovich T; Henik A
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2014 May; 67(5):899-917. PubMed ID: 24070376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.