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 *

214 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29520444)

  • 1. Sensory adaptation and inhibition of return: dissociating multiple inhibitory cueing effects.
    Lim A; Eng V; Janssen SMJ; Satel J
    Exp Brain Res; 2018 May; 236(5):1369-1382. PubMed ID: 29520444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Returning to "inhibition of return" by dissociating long-term oculomotor IOR from short-term sensory adaptation and other nonoculomotor "inhibitory" cueing effects.
    Hilchey MD; Klein RM; Satel J
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2014 Aug; 40(4):1603-16. PubMed ID: 24820438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Modeling inhibition of return as short-term depression of early sensory input to the superior colliculus.
    Satel J; Wang Z; Trappenberg TP; Klein RM
    Vision Res; 2011 May; 51(9):987-96. PubMed ID: 21354199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Neural correlates of spatial and non-spatial inhibition of return (IOR) in attentional orienting.
    Zhou X; Chen Q
    Neuropsychologia; 2008 Sep; 46(11):2766-75. PubMed ID: 18597795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Temporal ambiguity of onsets in a cueing task prevents facilitation but not inhibition of return.
    Malevich T; Ardasheva L; Krüger HM; MacInnes WJ
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2018 Jan; 80(1):106-117. PubMed ID: 29075992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Stimulus-response incompatibility eliminates inhibitory cueing effects with saccadic but not manual responses.
    Eng V; Lim A; Kwon S; Gan SR; Jamaluddin SA; Janssen SMJ; Satel J
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2017 May; 79(4):1097-1106. PubMed ID: 28229429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Inhibitory cueing effects following manual and saccadic responses to arrow cues.
    Ding Y; He T; Satel J; Wang Z
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2016 May; 78(4):1020-9. PubMed ID: 26956560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. No supplementary evidence of attention to a spatial cue when saccadic facilitation is absent.
    MacInnes WJ; Bhatnagar R
    Sci Rep; 2018 Sep; 8(1):13289. PubMed ID: 30185930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Dissociable spatial and temporal effects of inhibition of return.
    Wang Z; Theeuwes J
    PLoS One; 2012; 7(8):e44290. PubMed ID: 22952949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effect of different directions of attentional shift on inhibition of return in three-dimensional space.
    Wang A; Liu X; Chen Q; Zhang M
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2016 Apr; 78(3):838-47. PubMed ID: 26758976
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Neural processes of attentional inhibition of return traced with magnetoencephalography.
    Ayabe T; Ishizu T; Kojima S; Urakawa T; Nishitani N; Kaneoke Y; Kakigi R
    Neuroscience; 2008 Oct; 156(3):769-80. PubMed ID: 18762232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Revisiting the global effect and inhibition of return.
    De Vries JP; Van der Stigchel S; Hooge IT; Verstraten FA
    Exp Brain Res; 2016 Oct; 234(10):2999-3009. PubMed ID: 27377069
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Shape effects on reflexive spatial selective attention and a plausible neurophysiological model.
    Patel SS; Peng X; Sereno AB
    Vision Res; 2010 Jun; 50(13):1235-48. PubMed ID: 20399801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. On the putative role of intervening events in exogenous attention.
    Martín-Arévalo E; Botta F; De Haro V; Lupiáñez J
    Psychol Res; 2021 Mar; 85(2):808-815. PubMed ID: 31720780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Revising the link between microsaccades and the spatial cueing of voluntary attention.
    Meyberg S; Sinn P; Engbert R; Sommer W
    Vision Res; 2017 Apr; 133():47-60. PubMed ID: 28163059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Inhibition of return revisited: Localized inhibition on top of a pervasive bias.
    Wang B; Yan C; Klein RM; Wang Z
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2018 Oct; 25(5):1861-1867. PubMed ID: 29247423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Vertical asymmetries and inhibition of return: effects of spatial and non-spatial cueing on behavior and visual ERPs.
    Gutiérrez-Domínguez FJ; Pazo-Álvarez P; Doallo S; Fuentes LJ; Lorenzo-López L; Amenedo E
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2014 Feb; 91(2):121-31. PubMed ID: 24342058
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Effects of central and peripheral cueing on perceptual and saccade performance.
    Moehler T; Fiehler K
    Vision Res; 2018 Feb; 143():26-33. PubMed ID: 29262304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Electrophysiological explorations of the cause and effect of inhibition of return in a cue-target paradigm.
    Tian Y; Klein RM; Satel J; Xu P; Yao D
    Brain Topogr; 2011 Jun; 24(2):164-82. PubMed ID: 21365310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The causal role of the left parietal lobe in facilitation and inhibition of return.
    Martín-Arévalo E; Lupiáñez J; Narganes-Pineda C; Marino G; Colás I; Chica AB
    Cortex; 2019 Aug; 117():311-322. PubMed ID: 31185374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.