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 *

149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26722837)

  • 1. The Doubting System 1: Evidence for automatic substitution sensitivity.
    Johnson ED; Tubau E; De Neys W
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2016 Feb; 164():56-64. PubMed ID: 26722837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Bats, balls, and substitution sensitivity: cognitive misers are no happy fools.
    De Neys W; Rossi S; Houdé O
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2013 Apr; 20(2):269-73. PubMed ID: 23417270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Second-guess: Testing the specificity of error detection in the bat-and-ball problem.
    Bago B; Raoelison M; De Neys W
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2019 Feb; 193():214-228. PubMed ID: 30665052
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. People Like Logical Truth: Testing the Intuitive Detection of Logical Value in Basic Propositions.
    Nakamura H; Kawaguchi J
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(12):e0169166. PubMed ID: 28036402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Thinking in a foreign language distorts allocation of cognitive effort: Evidence from reasoning.
    Białek M; Muda R; Stewart K; Niszczota P; Pieńkosz D
    Cognition; 2020 Dec; 205():104420. PubMed ID: 33032818
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Biased but in doubt: conflict and decision confidence.
    De Neys W; Cromheeke S; Osman M
    PLoS One; 2011 Jan; 6(1):e15954. PubMed ID: 21283574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Algebraic reasoning and bat-and-ball problem variants: Solving isomorphic algebra first facilitates problem solving later.
    Hoover JD; Healy AF
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2017 Dec; 24(6):1922-1928. PubMed ID: 28197896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The bright homunculus in our head: Individual differences in intuitive sensitivity to logical validity.
    Ghasemi O; Handley S; Howarth S
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2022 Mar; 75(3):508-535. PubMed ID: 34427470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. From bias to sound intuiting: Boosting correct intuitive reasoning.
    Boissin E; Caparos S; Raoelison M; De Neys W
    Cognition; 2021 Jun; 211():104645. PubMed ID: 33676145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The smart intuitor: Cognitive capacity predicts intuitive rather than deliberate thinking.
    Raoelison M; Thompson VA; De Neys W
    Cognition; 2020 Nov; 204():104381. PubMed ID: 32622211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Helping reasoners succeed in the Wason selection task: when executive learning discourages heuristic response but does not necessarily encourage logic.
    Rossi S; Cassotti M; Moutier S; Delcroix N; Houdé O
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(4):e0123024. PubMed ID: 25849555
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Do smart people have better intuitions?
    Thompson VA; Pennycook G; Trippas D; Evans JSBT
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2018 Jul; 147(7):945-961. PubMed ID: 29975089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Feeling we're biased: autonomic arousal and reasoning conflict.
    De Neys W; Moyens E; Vansteenwegen D
    Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci; 2010 May; 10(2):208-16. PubMed ID: 20498345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Belief inhibition in children's reasoning: memory-based evidence.
    Steegen S; De Neys W
    J Exp Child Psychol; 2012 Jun; 112(2):231-42. PubMed ID: 22402412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Logical intuition is not really about logic.
    Ghasemi O; Handley S; Howarth S; Newman IR; Thompson VA
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2022 Sep; 151(9):2009-2028. PubMed ID: 35130014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Belief inhibition during thinking: not always winning but at least taking part.
    De Neys W; Franssens S
    Cognition; 2009 Oct; 113(1):45-61. PubMed ID: 19703685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Evaluating the cognitive reflection test as a measure of intuition/reflection, numeracy, and insight problem solving, and the implications for understanding real-world judgments and beliefs.
    Patel N; Baker SG; Scherer LD
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2019 Dec; 148(12):2129-2153. PubMed ID: 31021149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Highly reflective reasoners show no signs of belief inhibition.
    Svedholm-Häkkinen AM
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2015 Jan; 154():69-76. PubMed ID: 25499057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Individual differences in conflict detection during reasoning.
    Frey D; Johnson ED; De Neys W
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2018 May; 71(5):1188-1208. PubMed ID: 28376653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Why is logic so likeable? A single-process account of argument evaluation with logic and liking judgments.
    Hayes BK; Wei P; Dunn JC; Stephens RG
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2020 Apr; 46(4):699-719. PubMed ID: 31343253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.