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 *

162 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27092101)

  • 1. Cognitive Modeling of Individual Variation in Reference Production and Comprehension.
    Hendriks P
    Front Psychol; 2016; 7():506. PubMed ID: 27092101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Referential choice across the lifespan: why children and elderly adults produce ambiguous pronouns.
    Hendriks P; Koster C; Hoeks JC
    Lang Cogn Process; 2014 May; 29(4):391-407. PubMed ID: 24771955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Linguistic Redundancy and its Effects on Younger and Older Adults' Real-Time Comprehension and Memory.
    Saryazdi R; Nuque J; Chambers CG
    Cogn Sci; 2022 Apr; 46(4):e13123. PubMed ID: 35377508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The social basis of referential communication: Speakers construct physical reference based on listeners' expected visual search.
    Jara-Ettinger J; Rubio-Fernandez P
    Psychol Rev; 2022 Nov; 129(6):1394-1413. PubMed ID: 34968132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. How Cognitive Load Influences Speakers' Choice of Referring Expressions.
    Vogels J; Krahmer E; Maes A
    Cogn Sci; 2015 Aug; 39(6):1396-418. PubMed ID: 25471259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Referential choice in a second language: evidence for a listener-oriented approach.
    Contemori C; Dussias PE
    Lang Cogn Neurosci; 2016; 31(10):1257-1272. PubMed ID: 28626775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. How WM load influences linguistic processing in adults: a computational model of pronoun interpretation in discourse.
    van Rij J; van Rijn H; Hendriks P
    Top Cogn Sci; 2013 Jul; 5(3):564-80. PubMed ID: 23757182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The contribution of form repetition to listeners' expectation of givenness in online reference resolution.
    Lee EK; Lam TQ; Watson DG
    Discourse Process; 2021; 58(9):820-836. PubMed ID: 34898762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The roles of feedback and working memory in children's reference production.
    Wardlow L; Heyman GD
    J Exp Child Psychol; 2016 Oct; 150():180-193. PubMed ID: 27322727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Individual differences in speakers' perspective taking: the roles of executive control and working memory.
    Wardlow L
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2013 Aug; 20(4):766-72. PubMed ID: 23408369
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. How Children Process Reduced Forms: A Computational Cognitive Modeling Approach to Pronoun Processing in Discourse.
    Vogelzang M; Guasti MT; van Rijn H; Hendriks P
    Cogn Sci; 2021 Apr; 45(4):e12951. PubMed ID: 33877711
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Language in context: Characterizing the comprehension of referential expressions with MEG.
    Brodbeck C; Pylkkänen L
    Neuroimage; 2017 Feb; 147():447-460. PubMed ID: 27989776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Who Is He? Children with ASD and ADHD Take the Listener into Account in Their Production of Ambiguous Pronouns.
    Kuijper SJ; Hartman CA; Hendriks P
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(7):e0132408. PubMed ID: 26147200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Referential adjustment during discourse production in Alzheimer's disease.
    Sandoz M; Iglesias K; Achim AM; Démonet JF; Fossard M
    J Clin Exp Neuropsychol; 2020 Sep; 42(7):710-724. PubMed ID: 32777976
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The relation between working memory and language comprehension in signers and speakers.
    Emmorey K; Giezen MR; Petrich JAF; Spurgeon E; O'Grady Farnady L
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2017 Jun; 177():69-77. PubMed ID: 28477456
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Referential Choices in a Collaborative Storytelling Task: Discourse Stages and Referential Complexity Matter.
    Fossard M; Achim AM; Rousier-Vercruyssen L; Gonzalez S; Bureau A; Champagne-Lavau M
    Front Psychol; 2018; 9():176. PubMed ID: 29515493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Referential Form and Memory for the Discourse History.
    Yoon SO; Benjamin AS; Brown-Schmidt S
    Cogn Sci; 2021 Apr; 45(4):e12964. PubMed ID: 33873236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Rational Redundancy in Referring Expressions: Evidence from Event-related Potentials.
    Tourtouri EN; Delogu F; Crocker MW
    Cogn Sci; 2021 Dec; 45(12):e13071. PubMed ID: 34897768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Looking at a contrast object before speaking boosts referential informativeness, but is not essential.
    Davies C; Kreysa H
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2017 Jul; 178():87-99. PubMed ID: 28628785
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The contribution of discursive and cognitive factors in referential choices made by elderly people during a narrative task.
    Sandoz M; Iglesias K; Achim AM; Fossard M
    Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn; 2024; 31(2):301-322. PubMed ID: 36602178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.