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 *

288 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26908247)

  • 1. Repetition or alternation of context influences sequential congruency effect depending on the presence of contingency.
    Atalay NB; Inan AB
    Psychol Res; 2017 Mar; 81(2):490-507. PubMed ID: 26908247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Contextual influences on the sequential congruency effect.
    Hutcheon TG; Spieler DH
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2014 Feb; 21(1):155-62. PubMed ID: 23821460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Congruency sequence effect without feature integration and contingency learning.
    Kim S; Cho YS
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2014 Jun; 149():60-8. PubMed ID: 24704781
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Now you see it, now you don't: controlling for contingencies and stimulus repetitions eliminates the Gratton effect.
    Schmidt JR; De Houwer J
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2011 Sep; 138(1):176-86. PubMed ID: 21745649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Multiple expectancies underlie the congruency sequence effect in confound-minimized tasks.
    Erb CD; Aschenbrenner AJ
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2019 Jul; 198():102869. PubMed ID: 31228719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Explaining response-repetition effects in task switching: evidence from switching cue modality suggests episodic binding and response inhibition.
    Koch I; Frings C; Schuch S
    Psychol Res; 2018 May; 82(3):570-579. PubMed ID: 28286905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Context-specific proportion congruent effects: Compound-cue contingency learning in disguise.
    Schmidt JR; Lemercier C
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2019 May; 72(5):1119-1130. PubMed ID: 29926760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Shifts in target modality cause attentional reset: Evidence from sequential modulation of crossmodal congruency effects.
    Kreutzfeldt M; Stephan DN; Willmes K; Koch I
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2016 Oct; 23(5):1466-1473. PubMed ID: 26813694
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Attentional control of response selection in task switching.
    Schneider DW
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2015 Oct; 41(5):1315-24. PubMed ID: 26076177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Determinants of congruency sequence effects without learning and memory confounds.
    Weissman DH; Jiang J; Egner T
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2014 Oct; 40(5):2022-2037. PubMed ID: 25089574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Functional characteristics of control adaptation in intermodal sensory processing.
    Melcher T; Pfister R; Busmann M; Schlüter MC; Leyhe T; Gruber O
    Brain Cogn; 2015 Jun; 96():43-55. PubMed ID: 25917247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Keeping Simon simple: examining the relationship between sequential modulations and feature repetitions with two stimuli, two locations and two responses.
    Hazeltine E; Akçay C; Mordkoff JT
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2011 Feb; 136(2):245-52. PubMed ID: 20708162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Alertness and cognitive control: Testing the early onset hypothesis.
    Schneider DW
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2018 May; 44(5):756-766. PubMed ID: 29154631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Contextual within-trial adaptation of cognitive control: Evidence from the combination of conflict tasks.
    Rey-Mermet A; Gade M
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2016 Oct; 42(10):1505-32. PubMed ID: 27149295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Flanker and Simon effects interact at the response selection stage.
    Treccani B; Cubelli R; Della Sala S; Umilta C
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2009; 62(9):1784-804. PubMed ID: 19180364
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Motivation by potential gains and losses affects control processes via different mechanisms in the attentional network.
    Paschke LM; Walter H; Steimke R; Ludwig VU; Gaschler R; Schubert T; Stelzel C
    Neuroimage; 2015 May; 111():549-61. PubMed ID: 25731995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Cognitive control controls the effect of irrelevant stimulus-response learning.
    Shi K; Wang L
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2024 Apr; 86(3):866-882. PubMed ID: 38413504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Generalizing attentional control across dimensions and tasks: evidence from transfer of proportion-congruent effects.
    Wühr P; Duthoo W; Notebaert W
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2015; 68(4):779-801. PubMed ID: 25380403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Congruency sequence effects and previous response times: conflict adaptation or temporal learning?
    Schmidt JR; Weissman DH
    Psychol Res; 2016 Jul; 80(4):590-607. PubMed ID: 26093801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Context-dependent repetition effects on recognition memory.
    Opitz B
    Brain Cogn; 2010 Jul; 73(2):110-8. PubMed ID: 20493623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.