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 *

151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28922997)

  • 1. How Social and Refractory Is the Social Psychological Refractory Period?
    Wühr P; Heuer H
    Exp Psychol; 2017 Jul; 64(4):273-281. PubMed ID: 28922997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Locus of backward crosstalk effects on task 1 in a psychological refractory period task.
    Ko YT; Miller J
    Exp Psychol; 2014 Jan; 61(1):30-7. PubMed ID: 23948390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Dual-task interference and response strategies in simulated car driving: impact of first-task characteristics on the psychological refractory period effect.
    Bock O; Wechsler K; Koch I; Schubert T
    Psychol Res; 2021 Mar; 85(2):568-576. PubMed ID: 31776662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Asymmetric interference in concurrent time-to-contact estimation: Cousin or twin of the psychological refractory period effect?
    Baurès R; DeLucia PR; Olson M; Oberfeld D
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2017 Feb; 79(2):698-711. PubMed ID: 27896708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Stress improves task processing efficiency in dual-tasks.
    Beste C; Yildiz A; Meissner TW; Wolf OT
    Behav Brain Res; 2013 Sep; 252():260-5. PubMed ID: 23769959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Eliminating dual-task costs by minimizing crosstalk between tasks: The role of modality and feature pairings.
    Göthe K; Oberauer K; Kliegl R
    Cognition; 2016 May; 150():92-108. PubMed ID: 26878090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Evidence for a response preparation bottleneck during dual-task performance: effect of a startling acoustic stimulus on the psychological refractory period.
    Maslovat D; Chua R; Spencer HC; Forgaard CJ; Carlsen AN; Franks IM
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2013 Nov; 144(3):481-7. PubMed ID: 24076331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Introspection about backward crosstalk in dual-task performance.
    Bratzke D; Janczyk M
    Psychol Res; 2021 Mar; 85(2):605-617. PubMed ID: 31974636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A neuropsychological assessment of dual-task costs in closed-head injury patients using Cohen's effect size estimation method.
    Dell'Acqua R; Sessa P; Pashler H
    Psychol Res; 2006 Nov; 70(6):553-61. PubMed ID: 16142490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Response grouping in the psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm: models and contamination effects.
    Ulrich R; Miller J
    Cogn Psychol; 2008 Sep; 57(2):75-121. PubMed ID: 18262510
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A startling acoustic stimulus interferes with upcoming motor preparation: Evidence for a startle refractory period.
    Maslovat D; Chua R; Carlsen AN; May C; Forgaard CJ; Franks IM
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2015 Jun; 158():36-42. PubMed ID: 25919668
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Temporal discrimination of one's own reaction times in dual-task performance: Context effects and methodological constraints.
    Bratzke D; Bryce D
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2016 Aug; 78(6):1806-16. PubMed ID: 27311578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Response-specific sources of dual-task interference in human pre-motor cortex.
    Marois R; Larson JM; Chun MM; Shima D
    Psychol Res; 2006 Nov; 70(6):436-47. PubMed ID: 16283409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Stopping while going! Response inhibition does not suffer dual-task interference.
    Yamaguchi M; Logan GD; Bissett PG
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2012 Feb; 38(1):123-34. PubMed ID: 21574740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Separate and shared sources of dual-task cost in stimulus identification and response selection.
    Arnell KM; Duncan J
    Cogn Psychol; 2002 Mar; 44(2):105-47. PubMed ID: 11863322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The locus of the emotional Stroop effect: a study with the PRP paradigm.
    Janczyk M; Augst S; Kunde W
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2014 Sep; 151():8-15. PubMed ID: 24904999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Can practice eliminate the psychological refractory period effect?
    Van Selst M; Ruthruff E; Johnston JC
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1999 Oct; 25(5):1268-83. PubMed ID: 10531663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The influence of training on the attentional blink and psychological refractory period.
    Garner KG; Tombu MN; Dux PE
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2014 May; 76(4):979-99. PubMed ID: 24627208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Are participants' reports of their own reaction times reliable? Re-examining introspective limitations in active and passive dual-task paradigms.
    Bryce D; Bratzke D
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2017 Jan; 172():1-9. PubMed ID: 27825020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Multisession, dual-task psychological refractory period practice benefits older and younger adults equally.
    Allen PA; Ruthruff E; Elicker JD; Lien MC
    Exp Aging Res; 2009 Oct; 35(4):369-99. PubMed ID: 20183098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.