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 *

111 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26595069)

  • 1. The response dynamics of recognition memory: Sensitivity and bias.
    Koop GJ; Criss AH
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2016 May; 42(5):671-85. PubMed ID: 26595069
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Differentiation and response bias in episodic memory: evidence from reaction time distributions.
    Criss AH
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2010 Mar; 36(2):484-99. PubMed ID: 20192544
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Investigating strength and frequency effects in recognition memory using type-2 signal detection theory.
    Higham PA; Perfect TJ; Bruno D
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2009 Jan; 35(1):57-80. PubMed ID: 19210081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The distribution of subjective memory strength: list strength and response bias.
    Criss AH
    Cogn Psychol; 2009 Dec; 59(4):297-319. PubMed ID: 19765699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Age and response bias: evidence from the strength-based mirror effect.
    Criss AH; Aue W; Kılıç A
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2014 Oct; 67(10):1910-24. PubMed ID: 24386987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Decomposing bias in different types of simple decisions.
    White CN; Poldrack RA
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2014 Mar; 40(2):385-398. PubMed ID: 24245536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Confidence in forced-choice recognition: What underlies the ratings?
    Zawadzka K; Higham PA; Hanczakowski M
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2017 Apr; 43(4):552-564. PubMed ID: 27685019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The Warrington Recognition Memory Test for words as a measure of response bias: total score and response time cutoffs developed on "real world" credible and noncredible subjects.
    Kim MS; Boone KB; Victor T; Marion SD; Amano S; Cottingham ME; Ziegler EA; Zeller MA
    Arch Clin Neuropsychol; 2010 Feb; 25(1):60-70. PubMed ID: 19906738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Aging and confidence judgments in item recognition.
    Voskuilen C; Ratcliff R; McKoon G
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2018 Jan; 44(1):1-23. PubMed ID: 28639799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Exploring the self-ownership effect: Separating stimulus and response biases.
    Golubickis M; Falben JK; Cunningham WA; Macrae CN
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2018 Feb; 44(2):295-306. PubMed ID: 28933899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Cross-task and cross-manipulation stability in shifting the decision criterion.
    Frithsen A; Kantner J; Lopez BA; Miller MB
    Memory; 2018 May; 26(5):653-663. PubMed ID: 29108456
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A dynamic stimulus-driven model of signal detection.
    Turner BM; Van Zandt T; Brown S
    Psychol Rev; 2011 Oct; 118(4):583-613. PubMed ID: 21895383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The effects of weak versus strong relational judgments on response bias in Two-Alternative-Forced-Choice recognition: Is the test criterion-free?
    Jou J; Flores S; Cortes HM; Leka BG
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2016 Jun; 167():30-44. PubMed ID: 27104925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Hypergraph-based recognition memory model for lifelong experience.
    Kim H; Park JH
    Comput Intell Neurosci; 2014; 2014():354703. PubMed ID: 25371665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Criterion setting and the dynamics of recognition memory.
    Cox GE; Shiffrin RM
    Top Cogn Sci; 2012 Jan; 4(1):135-50. PubMed ID: 22253186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Recognition memory and decision processes: a meta-analysis of remember, know, and guess responses.
    Gardiner JM; Ramponi C; Richardson-Klavehn A
    Memory; 2002 Mar; 10(2):83-98. PubMed ID: 11798439
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Distinguishing familiarity from fluency for the compound word pair effect in associative recognition.
    Ahmad FN; Hockley WE
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2017 Sep; 70(9):1768-1791. PubMed ID: 27415965
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Symmetry brings an impression of familiarity but does not improve recognition memory.
    Brodeur MB; Chauret M; Dion-Lessard G; Lepage M
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2011 Jul; 137(3):359-70. PubMed ID: 21549335
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A single trial analysis of EEG in recognition memory: Tracking the neural correlates of memory strength.
    Ratcliff R; Sederberg PB; Smith TA; Childers R
    Neuropsychologia; 2016 Dec; 93(Pt A):128-141. PubMed ID: 27693702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Diffusion model drift rates can be influenced by decision processes: an analysis of the strength-based mirror effect.
    Starns JJ; Ratcliff R; White CN
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2012 Sep; 38(5):1137-51. PubMed ID: 22545609
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.