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 *

235 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27819442)

  • 1. Was that a threat? Attentional biases by signals of threat.
    Preciado D; Munneke J; Theeuwes J
    Emotion; 2017 Apr; 17(3):478-486. PubMed ID: 27819442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Modulating the attentional bias in unilateral neglect: the effects of the strategic set.
    Bartolomeo P; Siéroff E; Decaix C; Chokron S
    Exp Brain Res; 2001 Apr; 137(3-4):432-44. PubMed ID: 11355388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Stimulus-driven attentional capture by subliminal onset cues.
    Schoeberl T; Fuchs I; Theeuwes J; Ansorge U
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2015 Apr; 77(3):737-48. PubMed ID: 25520044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Disentangling attention from action in the emotional spatial cueing task.
    Mulckhuyse M; Crombez G
    Cogn Emot; 2014; 28(7):1223-41. PubMed ID: 24467679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Can threat detection be enhanced using processing strategies by police trainees and officers?
    Williot A; Blanchette I
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2018 Jun; 187():9-18. PubMed ID: 29729440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effect of temporal predictability on exogenous attentional modulation of feedforward processing in the striate cortex.
    Dassanayake TL; Michie PT; Fulham R
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2016 Jul; 105():9-16. PubMed ID: 27114044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Modulation of auditory spatial attention by visual emotional cues: differential effects of attentional engagement and disengagement for pleasant and unpleasant cues.
    Harrison NR; Woodhouse R
    Cogn Process; 2016 May; 17(2):205-11. PubMed ID: 26842012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Attentional bias to threat: a perceptual accuracy approach.
    Van Damme S; Crombez G; Notebaert L
    Emotion; 2008 Dec; 8(6):820-7. PubMed ID: 19102593
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Enhancing allocation of visual attention with emotional cues presented in two sensory modalities.
    Zimmer U; Wendt M; Pacharra M
    Behav Brain Funct; 2022 Sep; 18(1):10. PubMed ID: 36138461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Spatial and temporal effects of spatial attention on human saccadic eye movements.
    Crawford TJ; Muller HJ
    Vision Res; 1992 Feb; 32(2):293-304. PubMed ID: 1574846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Target processing is facilitated by motivationally relevant cues.
    Briggs KE; Martin FH
    Biol Psychol; 2008 Apr; 78(1):29-42. PubMed ID: 18262710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Top-down modulation of alpha power and pattern similarity for threatening representations in visual short-term memory.
    Kuo BC; Li CH; Lin SH; Hu SH; Yeh YY
    Neuropsychologia; 2017 Nov; 106():21-30. PubMed ID: 28887064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Detection costs and contingent attentional capture.
    Schönhammer JG; Kerzel D
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2017 Feb; 79(2):429-437. PubMed ID: 27896707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The impact of probabilistic feature cueing depends on the level of cue abstraction.
    Dombert PL; Fink GR; Vossel S
    Exp Brain Res; 2016 Mar; 234(3):685-94. PubMed ID: 26586268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The role of top-down spatial attention in contingent attentional capture.
    Huang W; Su Y; Zhen Y; Qu Z
    Psychophysiology; 2016 May; 53(5):650-62. PubMed ID: 26879628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Neural systems for orienting attention to the location of threat signals: an event-related fMRI study.
    Pourtois G; Schwartz S; Seghier ML; Lazeyras F; Vuilleumier P
    Neuroimage; 2006 Jun; 31(2):920-33. PubMed ID: 16487729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Attentional capture by context cues, not inhibition of cue singletons, explains same location costs.
    Schönhammer JG; Becker SI; Kerzel D
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2020 Jun; 46(6):610-628. PubMed ID: 32191113
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A time-course analysis of attentional cueing by threatening scenes.
    Koster EH; Crombez G; Verschuere B; Vanvolsem P; De Houwer J
    Exp Psychol; 2007; 54(2):161-71. PubMed ID: 17472099
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Mixed signals: The effect of conflicting reward- and goal-driven biases on selective attention.
    Preciado D; Munneke J; Theeuwes J
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2017 Jul; 79(5):1297-1310. PubMed ID: 28439793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The time course of attentional bias to cues of threat and safety.
    Schmidt LJ; Belopolsky AV; Theeuwes J
    Cogn Emot; 2017 Aug; 31(5):845-857. PubMed ID: 27050428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.