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 *

145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29648863)

  • 21. Input and output modes modulate phonological and semantic contributions to immediate serial recall: evidence from a brain-damaged patient.
    Chassé V; Belleville S
    Cogn Neuropsychol; 2009 Mar; 26(2):195-216. PubMed ID: 19418315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Phonological similarity effects in verbal complex span.
    Lobley KJ; Baddeley AD; Gathercole SE
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2005 Nov; 58(8):1462-78. PubMed ID: 16365950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The phonological-similarity effect differentiates between two working memory tasks.
    MacAndrew DK; Klatzky RL; Fiez JA; McClelland JL; Becke JT
    Psychol Sci; 2002 Sep; 13(5):465-8. PubMed ID: 12219815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Reexamining the phonological similarity effect in immediate serial recall: the roles of type of similarity, category cuing, and item recall.
    Gupta P; Lipinski J; Aktunc E
    Mem Cognit; 2005 Sep; 33(6):1001-16. PubMed ID: 16496721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Lexicality and phonological similarity: a challenge for the retrieval-based account of serial recall?
    Fallon AB; Mak E; Tehan G; Daly C
    Memory; 2005; 13(3-4):349-56. PubMed ID: 15948620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Type-specific proactive interference in patients with semantic and phonological STM deficits.
    Harris L; Olson A; Humphreys G
    Memory; 2014; 22(8):972-89. PubMed ID: 24295224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Depth of phonological recoding in short-term memory.
    Xu Y
    Mem Cognit; 1991 May; 19(3):263-73. PubMed ID: 1861612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Theoretical implications of articulatory duration, phonological similarity, and phonological complexity in verbal working memory.
    Mueller ST; Seymour TL; Kieras DE; Meyer DE
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2003 Nov; 29(6):1353-80. PubMed ID: 14622066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Immunity to proactive interference is not a property of the focus of attention in working memory.
    Ralph A; Walters JN; Stevens A; Fitzgerald KJ; Tehan G; Surprenant AM; Neath I; Turcotte J
    Mem Cognit; 2011 Feb; 39(2):217-30. PubMed ID: 21264609
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Modulating the phonological similarity effect: the contribution of interlist similarity and lexicality.
    Karlsen PJ; Lian A
    Mem Cognit; 2005 Apr; 33(3):542-56. PubMed ID: 16156188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Phonological similarity effects in simple and complex span tasks.
    Macnamara BN; Moore AB; Conway AR
    Mem Cognit; 2011 Oct; 39(7):1174-86. PubMed ID: 21503805
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Visual similarity effects in immediate serial recall and (sometimes) in immediate serial recognition.
    Chubala CM; Guitard D; Neath I; Saint-Aubin J; Surprenant AM
    Mem Cognit; 2020 Apr; 48(3):411-425. PubMed ID: 31701325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Positional uncertainty in the Brown-Peterson paradigm.
    Quinlan JA; Neath I; Surprenant AM
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2015 Mar; 69(1):64-71. PubMed ID: 25730641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Interference between storage and processing in working memory: Feature overwriting, not similarity-based competition.
    Oberauer K
    Mem Cognit; 2009 Apr; 37(3):346-57. PubMed ID: 19246349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. When does between-sequence phonological similarity promote irrelevant sound disruption?
    Marsh JE; Vachon F; Jones DM
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2008 Jan; 34(1):243-8. PubMed ID: 18194067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Phonological similarity in working memory span tasks.
    Chow M; Macnamara BN; Conway AR
    Mem Cognit; 2016 Aug; 44(6):937-49. PubMed ID: 27048510
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. The effect of visual similarity on short-term memory for spatial location: implications for the capacity of visual short-term memory.
    Walker P; Hitch GJ; Duroe S
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 1993 Aug; 83(3):203-24. PubMed ID: 8213213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Creating proactive interference in immediate recall: building a dog from a dart, a mop, and a fig.
    Tehan G; Humphreys MS
    Mem Cognit; 1998 May; 26(3):477-89. PubMed ID: 9610119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Irrelevant sound disrupts speech production: exploring the relationship between short-term memory and experimentally induced slips of the tongue.
    Saito S; Baddeley A
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2004 Oct; 57(7):1309-40. PubMed ID: 15513248
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Proactive interference and item similarity in working memory.
    Bunting M
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2006 Mar; 32(2):183-196. PubMed ID: 16569140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.