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 *

92 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28462620)

  • 41. Auditioning the distinctiveness account: Expanding the production effect to the auditory modality reveals the superiority of writing over vocalising.
    Mama Y; Icht M
    Memory; 2016; 24(1):98-113. PubMed ID: 25483326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Cross-modal activation of auditory regions during visuo-spatial working memory in early deafness.
    Ding H; Qin W; Liang M; Ming D; Wan B; Li Q; Yu C
    Brain; 2015 Sep; 138(Pt 9):2750-65. PubMed ID: 26070981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Effects of same-modality interference on immediate serial recall of auditory and visual information.
    Turner ML; Johnson SK; McNamara DS; Engle RW
    J Gen Psychol; 1992 Jul; 119(3):247-63. PubMed ID: 1447561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Experience and information loss in auditory and visual memory.
    Gloede ME; Paulauskas EE; Gregg MK
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2017 Jul; 70(7):1344-1352. PubMed ID: 27118246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Autobiographical elaboration reduces memory distortion: cognitive operations and the distinctiveness heuristic.
    McDonough IM; Gallo DA
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2008 Nov; 34(6):1430-45. PubMed ID: 18980406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Auditory speech recognition and visual text recognition in younger and older adults: similarities and differences between modalities and the effects of presentation rate.
    Humes LE; Burk MH; Coughlin MP; Busey TA; Strauser LE
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Apr; 50(2):283-303. PubMed ID: 17463230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. A Positive Generation Effect on Memory for Auditory Context.
    Overman AA; Richard AG; Stephens JDW
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2017 Jun; 24(3):944-949. PubMed ID: 27696145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Intrusive effects of implicitly processed information on explicit memory.
    Sentz DF; Kirkhart MW; LoPresto C; Sobelman S
    Percept Mot Skills; 2002 Feb; 94(1):241-50. PubMed ID: 11883569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. False item recognition in patients with Alzheimer's disease.
    Abe N; Fujii T; Nishio Y; Iizuka O; Kanno S; Kikuchi H; Takagi M; Hiraoka K; Yamasaki H; Choi H; Hirayama K; Shinohara M; Mori E
    Neuropsychologia; 2011 Jun; 49(7):1897-902. PubMed ID: 21419789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. When does memory monitoring succeed versus fail? Comparing item-specific and relational encoding in the DRM paradigm.
    Huff MJ; Bodner GE
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2013 Jul; 39(4):1246-56. PubMed ID: 23356241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. A grouping interpretation of the modality effect in immediate probed recognition.
    Murray DJ; Boudreau N; Burggraf KK; Dobell L; Guger SL; Leask A; Stanford L; Tate TL; Wheeler M
    Mem Cognit; 1999 Mar; 27(2):234-45. PubMed ID: 10226434
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Modality effects in memory for basic stimulus attributes: a temporal and nontemporal comparison.
    Ogden RS; Jones LA
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2011 Jul; 64(7):1354-71. PubMed ID: 21347991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. The modality-match effect in recognition memory.
    Mulligan NW; Osborn K
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2009 Mar; 35(2):564-71. PubMed ID: 19271869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. The dual effect of context on memory of related and unrelated themes: discrimination at encoding and cue at retrieval.
    Levy-Gigi E; Vakil E
    Memory; 2012; 20(7):728-41. PubMed ID: 22809325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. False memory following rapidly presented lists: the element of surprise.
    Whittlesea BW; Masson ME; Hughes AD
    Psychol Res; 2005 Jun; 69(5-6):420-30. PubMed ID: 15856285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Orthographic distinctiveness and semantic elaboration provide separate contributions to memory.
    Kirchhoff BA; Schapiro ML; Buckner RL
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2005 Dec; 17(12):1841-54. PubMed ID: 16356323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Echoic and retrieval accounts of the long-term modality effect tested using the suffix procedure.
    Huang ST; Glenberg AM
    Am J Psychol; 1986; 99(4):453-70. PubMed ID: 3812815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Sensory modality specificity of neural activity related to memory in visual cortex.
    Gibson JR; Maunsell JH
    J Neurophysiol; 1997 Sep; 78(3):1263-75. PubMed ID: 9310418
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Encoding context and false recognition memories.
    Bruce D; Phillips-Grant K; Conrad N; Bona S
    Memory; 2004 Sep; 12(5):562-70. PubMed ID: 15615315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Enumeration produces poor primacy for tactile presentation relative to visual and auditory presentation as the only modality effect.
    Gibbons JA; Velkey AJ; Partin KT
    Percept Mot Skills; 2008 Jun; 106(3):795-810. PubMed ID: 18712201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.