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 *

231 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28272263)

  • 1. Response inhibition is more effortful than response activation: behavioral and electrophysiological evidence.
    Gao H; Qi M; Zhang Q
    Neuroreport; 2017 May; 28(7):404-407. PubMed ID: 28272263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Spatiotemporal characterization of response inhibition.
    Albert J; López-Martín S; Hinojosa JA; Carretié L
    Neuroimage; 2013 Aug; 76():272-81. PubMed ID: 23523776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Response competition and response inhibition during different choice-discrimination tasks: evidence from ERP measured inside MRI scanner.
    Gonzalez-Rosa JJ; Inuggi A; Blasi V; Cursi M; Annovazzi P; Comi G; Falini A; Leocani L
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2013 Jul; 89(1):37-47. PubMed ID: 23664841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Movement-related potentials in the Go/NoGo task: the P3 reflects both cognitive and motor inhibition.
    Smith JL; Johnstone SJ; Barry RJ
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2008 Mar; 119(3):704-714. PubMed ID: 18164657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Response inhibition and interference control in children with AD/HD: a visual ERP investigation.
    Johnstone SJ; Barry RJ; Markovska V; Dimoska A; Clarke AR
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2009 May; 72(2):145-53. PubMed ID: 19095016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Electrophysiological correlates of behavioral response inhibition in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder.
    Kim MS; Kim YY; Yoo SY; Kwon JS
    Depress Anxiety; 2007; 24(1):22-31. PubMed ID: 16933318
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A carry-over task rule in task switching: an ERP investigation using a Go/Nogo paradigm.
    Umebayashi K; Okita T
    Biol Psychol; 2013 Feb; 92(2):295-300. PubMed ID: 23182873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Preparing for (valenced) action: The role of differential effort in the orthogonalized go/no-go task.
    Schevernels H; Bombeke K; Krebs RM; Boehler CN
    Psychophysiology; 2016 Feb; 53(2):186-97. PubMed ID: 26481327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A combined forced-attention dichotic listening - Go/Nogo task to assess response inhibition and interference suppression: An auditory event-related potential investigation.
    Bedoin N; Abadie R; Krzonowski J; Ferragne E; Marcastel A
    Neuropsychology; 2019 Nov; 33(8):1136-1150. PubMed ID: 31380670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Effect of acute psychological stress on response inhibition: An event-related potential study.
    Qi M; Gao H; Liu G
    Behav Brain Res; 2017 Apr; 323():32-37. PubMed ID: 28130173
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Sequence effects in the Go/NoGo task: inhibition and facilitation.
    Thomas SJ; Gonsalvez CJ; Johnstone SJ
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2009 Dec; 74(3):209-19. PubMed ID: 19751776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Auditory-induced emotion modulates processes of response inhibition: an event-related potential study.
    Yu F; Yuan J; Luo YJ
    Neuroreport; 2009 Jan; 20(1):25-30. PubMed ID: 18978645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Varying task difficulty in the Go/Nogo task: the effects of inhibitory control, arousal, and perceived effort on ERP components.
    Benikos N; Johnstone SJ; Roodenrys SJ
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2013 Mar; 87(3):262-72. PubMed ID: 22902315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. CNV resolution does not cause NoGo anteriorisation of the P3: a failure to replicate Simson et al.
    Smith JL; Barry RJ; Steiner GZ
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2013 Sep; 89(3):349-57. PubMed ID: 23669175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.