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 *

151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27044388)

  • 1. High spatial validity is not sufficient to elicit voluntary shifts of attention.
    Pauszek JR; Gibson BS
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2016 Oct; 78(7):2110-23. PubMed ID: 27044388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The Least Costs Hypothesis: A rational analysis approach to the voluntary symbolic control of attention.
    Pauszek JR; Gibson BS
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2018 Aug; 44(8):1199-1215. PubMed ID: 29708384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Going rogue in the spatial cuing paradigm: high spatial validity is insufficient to elicit voluntary shifts of attention.
    Davis GJ; Gibson BS
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2012 Oct; 38(5):1192-201. PubMed ID: 22390290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Revising the link between microsaccades and the spatial cueing of voluntary attention.
    Meyberg S; Sinn P; Engbert R; Sommer W
    Vision Res; 2017 Apr; 133():47-60. PubMed ID: 28163059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparing intramodal and crossmodal cuing in the endogenous orienting of spatial attention.
    Chica AB; Sanabria D; Lupiáñez J; Spence C
    Exp Brain Res; 2007 May; 179(3):353-64. PubMed ID: 17160401
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Masked stimuli modulate endogenous shifts of spatial attention.
    Palmer S; Mattler U
    Conscious Cogn; 2013 Jun; 22(2):486-503. PubMed ID: 23528730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Endogenous temporal and spatial orienting: Evidence for two distinct attentional mechanisms.
    Weinbach N; Shofty I; Gabay S; Henik A
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2015 Aug; 22(4):967-73. PubMed ID: 25338657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Towards a unified model of vision and attention: Effects of visual landmarks and identity cues on covert and overt attention movements.
    Lambert AJ; Wilkie J; Greenwood A; Ryckman N; Sciberras-Lim E; Booker LJ; Tahara-Eckl L
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2018 Mar; 44(3):412-432. PubMed ID: 28816478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The time course of attention: selection is transient.
    Wilschut A; Theeuwes J; Olivers CN
    PLoS One; 2011; 6(11):e27661. PubMed ID: 22125619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Location and features of instructive spatial cues do not influence the time course of covert shifts of visual spatial attention.
    Müller MM
    Biol Psychol; 2008 Mar; 77(3):292-303. PubMed ID: 18083290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effects of spatial, temporal and spatiotemporal cueing are alike when attention is directed voluntarily.
    Olk B
    Exp Brain Res; 2014 Nov; 232(11):3623-33. PubMed ID: 25081102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The footprints of visual attention during search with 100% valid and 100% invalid cues.
    Eckstein MP; Pham BT; Shimozaki SS
    Vision Res; 2004 Jun; 44(12):1193-207. PubMed ID: 15066385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Changes in visuospatial attention over the adult lifespan.
    Greenwood PM; Parasuraman R; Haxby JV
    Neuropsychologia; 1993 May; 31(5):471-85. PubMed ID: 8502379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Automated symbolic orienting is not modulated by explicit temporal attention.
    Hayward DA; Ristic J
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2016 Nov; 171():93-98. PubMed ID: 27743523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Control mechanisms mediating shifts of attention in auditory and visual space: a spatio-temporal ERP analysis.
    Green JJ; Teder-Sälejärvi WA; McDonald JJ
    Exp Brain Res; 2005 Oct; 166(3-4):358-69. PubMed ID: 16075294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Trial-by-trial modulation of express visuomotor responses induced by symbolic or barely detectable cues.
    Contemori S; Loeb GE; Corneil BD; Wallis G; Carroll TJ
    J Neurophysiol; 2021 Nov; 126(5):1507-1523. PubMed ID: 34550012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Evaluating Amazon's Mechanical Turk for psychological research on the symbolic control of attention.
    Pauszek JR; Sztybel P; Gibson BS
    Behav Res Methods; 2017 Dec; 49(6):1969-1983. PubMed ID: 28127682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Guiding attention to specific locations by combining symbolic information about direction and distance: are human observers direction experts?
    Gibson BS; Sztybel P
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2014 Apr; 40(2):731-51. PubMed ID: 24245500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Attention shifts in the spatial cueing paradigm reflect direct influences of experience and not top-down goals.
    Trost JM; Gibson BS
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2024 Aug; 31(4):1536-1547. PubMed ID: 38114779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Same-location costs in peripheral cueing: The role of cue awareness and feature changes.
    Schoeberl T; Ditye T; Ansorge U
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2018 Mar; 44(3):433-451. PubMed ID: 28816482
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.