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 *

173 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26762518)

  • 1. Cue response dissociates inhibitory processes: task identity information is related to backward inhibition but not to competitor rule suppression.
    Regev S; Meiran N
    Psychol Res; 2017 Jan; 81(1):168-181. PubMed ID: 26762518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Cue-type manipulation dissociates two types of task set inhibition: backward inhibition and competitor rule suppression.
    Regev S; Meiran N
    Psychol Res; 2016 Jul; 80(4):625-39. PubMed ID: 25822920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Resolving task rule incongruence during task switching by competitor rule suppression.
    Meiran N; Hsieh S; Dimov E
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2010 Jul; 36(4):992-1002. PubMed ID: 20565214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Heightened conflict in cue-target translation increases backward inhibition in set switching.
    Grange JA; Houghton G
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2010 Jul; 36(4):1003-9. PubMed ID: 20565215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Episodic retrieval and decaying inhibition in the competitor-rule suppression phenomenon.
    Hsieh S; Chang CC; Meiran N
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2012 Nov; 141(3):316-21. PubMed ID: 23085143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. "Smart inhibition": electrophysiological evidence for the suppression of conflict-generating task rules during task switching.
    Meiran N; Hsieh S; Chang CC
    Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci; 2011 Sep; 11(3):292-308. PubMed ID: 21590505
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. "Optimal suppression" as a solution to the paradoxical cost of multitasking: examination of suppression specificity in task switching.
    Katzir M; Ori B; Meiran N
    Psychol Res; 2018 Jan; 82(1):24-39. PubMed ID: 29075843
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A neural mechanism of cognitive control for resolving conflict between abstract task rules.
    Sheu YS; Courtney SM
    Cortex; 2016 Dec; 85():13-24. PubMed ID: 27771559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The role of cue-target translation in backward inhibition of attentional set.
    Houghton G; Pritchard R; Grange JA
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2009 Mar; 35(2):466-76. PubMed ID: 19271859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The Maturation of Interference Suppression and Response Inhibition: ERP Analysis of a Cued Go/Nogo Task.
    Vuillier L; Bryce D; Szücs D; Whitebread D
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(11):e0165697. PubMed ID: 27814356
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Conflict and inhibition in the cued-Go/NoGo task.
    Randall WM; Smith JL
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2011 Dec; 122(12):2400-7. PubMed ID: 21715225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Cue type affects preparatory influences on task inhibition.
    Gade M; Koch I
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2014 May; 148():12-8. PubMed ID: 24486802
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Cue-independent task-specific representations in task switching: evidence from backward inhibition.
    Altmann EM
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2007 Sep; 33(5):892-9. PubMed ID: 17723067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Competitor rule priming: evidence for priming of task rules in task switching.
    Katzir M; Ori B; Hsieh S; Meiran N
    Psychol Res; 2015 May; 79(3):446-62. PubMed ID: 24947758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The influence of cue type on backward inhibition.
    Arbuthnott KD
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2005 Sep; 31(5):1030-42. PubMed ID: 16248749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Switching, plasticity, and prediction in a saccadic task-switch paradigm.
    Barton JJ; Greenzang C; Hefter R; Edelman J; Manoach DS
    Exp Brain Res; 2006 Jan; 168(1-2):76-87. PubMed ID: 16096781
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Neural correlates of cue retrieval, task set reconfiguration, and rule mapping in the explicit cue task switching paradigm.
    Travers S; West R
    Psychophysiology; 2008 Jul; 45(4):588-601. PubMed ID: 18282198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Response priming in the Go/NoGo task: the N2 reflects neither inhibition nor conflict.
    Smith JL; Johnstone SJ; Barry RJ
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2007 Feb; 118(2):343-55. PubMed ID: 17140848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Incorrect predictions reduce switch costs.
    Kleinsorge T; Scheil J
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2015 Jul; 159():52-60. PubMed ID: 26024967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cue- versus response-locked processes in backward inhibition: evidence from ERPs.
    Sinai M; Goffaux P; Phillips NA
    Psychophysiology; 2007 Jul; 44(4):596-609. PubMed ID: 17451492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.