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 *

211 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27289050)

  • 1. ERP Go/NoGo condition effects are better detected with separate PCAs.
    Barry RJ; De Blasio FM; Fogarty JS; Karamacoska D
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2016 Aug; 106():50-64. PubMed ID: 27289050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A processing schema for children in the auditory equiprobable Go/NoGo task: ERP components and behaviour.
    Barry RJ; De Blasio FM; Fogarty JS
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2018 Jan; 123():74-79. PubMed ID: 29122654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Sequential processing in the equiprobable auditory Go/NoGo task: children vs. adults.
    Barry RJ; De Blasio FM; Borchard JP
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2014 Oct; 125(10):1995-2006. PubMed ID: 24661623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Sequential processing in young and older adults in the equiprobable auditory Go/NoGo task.
    Barry RJ; De Blasio FM; Cave AE
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2016 May; 127(5):2273-85. PubMed ID: 27072100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Child sex differences in the auditory equiprobable Go/NoGo task.
    Barry RJ; De Blasio FM; Cave AE
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2022 Jul; 177():148-158. PubMed ID: 35605691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Sequential processing in an auditory equiprobable Go/NoGo task with variable interstimulus interval.
    Borchard JP; Barry RJ; De Blasio FM
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2015 Aug; 97(2):145-52. PubMed ID: 26024616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Sequential processing in the equiprobable auditory Go/NoGo task: a temporal PCA study.
    Barry RJ; De Blasio FM
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2013 Jul; 89(1):123-7. PubMed ID: 23792217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Development of children's performance and ERP components in the equiprobable Go/NoGo task.
    Barry RJ; De Blasio FM; Cave AE
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2022 Jan; 171():12-19. PubMed ID: 34852243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Auditory equiprobable NoGo P3: A single-trial latency-adjusted ERP analysis.
    Fogarty JS; Barry RJ; Steiner-Lim GZ
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2022 Dec; 182():90-104. PubMed ID: 36216120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Prestimulus alpha and beta determinants of ERP responses in the Go/NoGo task.
    De Blasio FM; Barry RJ
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2013 Jul; 89(1):9-17. PubMed ID: 23643562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Sex differences in equiprobable auditory Go/NoGo task: effects on N2 and P3.
    Melynyte S; Ruksenas O; Griskova-Bulanova I
    Exp Brain Res; 2017 May; 235(5):1565-1574. PubMed ID: 28258436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Stimulus-to-matching-stimulus interval influences N1, P2, and P3b in an equiprobable Go/NoGo task.
    Steiner GZ; Barry RJ; Gonsalvez CJ
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2014 Oct; 94(1):59-68. PubMed ID: 25034341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Electrophysiological underpinnings of response variability in the Go/NoGo task.
    Karamacoska D; Barry RJ; Steiner GZ
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2018 Dec; 134():159-167. PubMed ID: 30266622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Effects of task complexity on ERP components in Go/Nogo tasks.
    Gajewski PD; Falkenstein M
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2013 Mar; 87(3):273-8. PubMed ID: 22906814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparative analysis of event-related potentials during Go/NoGo and CPT: decomposition of electrophysiological markers of response inhibition and sustained attention.
    Kirmizi-Alsan E; Bayraktaroglu Z; Gurvit H; Keskin YH; Emre M; Demiralp T
    Brain Res; 2006 Aug; 1104(1):114-28. PubMed ID: 16824492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Manipulating the focus of attention in working memorygo/no-go task: Inhibition in young adults.
    Fogarty JS; Barry RJ; De Blasio FM; Steiner GZ
    Psychophysiology; 2018 Jul; 55(7):e13065. PubMed ID: 29383725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. EEG phase states at stimulus onset in a variable-ISI Go/NoGo task: Effects on ERP components.
    Barry RJ; Fogarty JS; De Blasio FM; Karamacoska D
    Biol Psychol; 2018 Apr; 134():89-102. PubMed ID: 29462656
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Caffeine affects children's ERPs and performance in an equiprobable go/no-go task: Testing a processing schema.
    Barry RJ; De Blasio FM; Fogarty JS
    Psychophysiology; 2019 May; 56(5):e13330. PubMed ID: 30657186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Using principal components analysis to examine resting state EEG in relation to task performance.
    Karamacoska D; Barry RJ; Steiner GZ
    Psychophysiology; 2019 May; 56(5):e13327. PubMed ID: 30613986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effects of age on cognitive control during semantic categorization.
    Mudar RA; Chiang HS; Maguire MJ; Spence JS; Eroh J; Kraut MA; Hart J
    Behav Brain Res; 2015; 287():285-93. PubMed ID: 25823764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.