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: 29942273)

  • 1. Evaluative Processing of Food Images: A Conditional Role for Viewing in Preference Formation.
    Wolf A; Ounjai K; Takahashi M; Kobayashi S; Matsuda T; Lauwereyns J
    Front Psychol; 2018; 9():936. PubMed ID: 29942273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluative Processing of Food Images: Longer Viewing for Indecisive Preference Formation.
    Wolf A; Ounjai K; Takahashi M; Kobayashi S; Matsuda T; Lauwereyns J
    Front Psychol; 2019; 10():608. PubMed ID: 30949106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Urgency Promotes Affective Disengagement: Effects From Bivalent Cues on Preference Formation for Abstract Images.
    Xu J; Zommara NM; Ounjai K; Takahashi M; Kobayashi S; Matsuda T; Lauwereyns J
    Front Psychol; 2020; 11():1404. PubMed ID: 32655459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Neural Mechanisms Determining the Duration of Task-free, Self-paced Visual Perception.
    Baror S; Baumgarten TJ; He BJ
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2024 May; 36(5):756-775. PubMed ID: 38357932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Attentional synchrony and the influence of viewing task on gaze behavior in static and dynamic scenes.
    Smith TJ; Mital PK
    J Vis; 2013 Jul; 13(8):. PubMed ID: 23863509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The effect of gaze-contingent stimulus elimination on preference judgments.
    Morii M; Sakagami T
    Front Psychol; 2015; 6():1351. PubMed ID: 26441727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Tracking the Influence of Predictive Cues on the Evaluation of Food Images: Volatility Enables Nudging.
    Ounjai K; Suppaso L; Hohwy J; Lauwereyns J
    Front Psychol; 2020; 11():569078. PubMed ID: 33041935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A gaze bias with coarse spatial indexing during a gambling task.
    Zommara NM; Takahashi M; Ounjai K; Lauwereyns J
    Cogn Neurodyn; 2018 Apr; 12(2):171-181. PubMed ID: 29564026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Active Confirmation Bias in the Evaluative Processing of Food Images.
    Ounjai K; Kobayashi S; Takahashi M; Matsuda T; Lauwereyns J
    Sci Rep; 2018 Nov; 8(1):16864. PubMed ID: 30443034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Chewing Stimulation Reduces Appetite Ratings and Attentional Bias toward Visual Food Stimuli in Healthy-Weight Individuals.
    Ikeda A; Miyamoto JJ; Usui N; Taira M; Moriyama K
    Front Psychol; 2018; 9():99. PubMed ID: 29472880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Eye preferences in common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus): influence of age, stimulus, and hand preference.
    Hook-Costigan MA; Rogers LJ
    Laterality; 1998 Apr; 3(2):109-30. PubMed ID: 15513078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The framing of choice nudges prolonged processing in the evaluation of food images.
    Xu J; Jin Y; Lauwereyns J
    Front Psychol; 2023; 14():1039251. PubMed ID: 37359857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A systematic review of structured versus non-structured breastfeeding programmes to support the initiation and duration of exclusive breastfeeding in acute and primary healthcare settings.
    Beake S; Pellowe C; Dykes F; Schmied V; Bick D
    JBI Libr Syst Rev; 2011; 9(36):1471-1508. PubMed ID: 27820165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Women gaze behaviour in assessing female bodies: the effects of clothing, body size, own body composition and body satisfaction.
    Cundall A; Guo K
    Psychol Res; 2017 Jan; 81(1):1-12. PubMed ID: 26586290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Gaze shifts do not affect preference judgments of graphic patterns.
    Nittono H; Wada Y
    Percept Mot Skills; 2009 Aug; 109(1):79-94. PubMed ID: 19831089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. How Long Did You Look At Me? The Influence of Gaze Direction on Perceived Duration and Temporal Sensitivity.
    Thönes S; Hecht H
    Perception; 2016 Jun; 45(6):612-630. PubMed ID: 26895775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Do baby-friendly hospitals influence breastfeeding duration on a national level?
    Merten S; Dratva J; Ackermann-Liebrich U
    Pediatrics; 2005 Nov; 116(5):e702-8. PubMed ID: 16263985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Fixation durations in scene viewing: Modeling the effects of local image features, oculomotor parameters, and task.
    Nuthmann A
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2017 Apr; 24(2):370-392. PubMed ID: 27480268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Does my brain want what my eyes like? - How food liking and choice influence spatio-temporal brain dynamics of food viewing.
    Bielser ML; Crézé C; Murray MM; Toepel U
    Brain Cogn; 2016 Dec; 110():64-73. PubMed ID: 26578256
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Stimulus exposure and gaze bias: a further test of the gaze cascade model.
    Glaholt MG; Reingold EM
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2009 Apr; 71(3):445-50. PubMed ID: 19304635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.