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 *

206 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29971643)

  • 1. The bottleneck of the psychological refractory period effect involves timing of response initiation rather than response selection.
    Klapp ST; Maslovat D; Jagacinski RJ
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2019 Feb; 26(1):29-47. PubMed ID: 29971643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Does the central bottleneck encompass voluntary selection of hedonically based choices?
    Pashler H; Harris CR; Nuechterlein KH
    Exp Psychol; 2008; 55(5):313-21. PubMed ID: 25116298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The psychological refractory period of stopping.
    Horstmann G
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2003 Oct; 29(5):965-81. PubMed ID: 14585017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A shared cortical bottleneck underlying Attentional Blink and Psychological Refractory Period.
    Marti S; Sigman M; Dehaene S
    Neuroimage; 2012 Feb; 59(3):2883-98. PubMed ID: 21988891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Programming of action timing cannot be completed until immediately prior to initiation of the response to be controlled.
    Klapp ST; Maslovat D
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2020 Oct; 27(5):821-832. PubMed ID: 32514798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. The psychological refractory period effect following callosotomy: uncoupling of lateralized response codes.
    Ivry RB; Franz EA; Kingstone A; Johnston JC
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1998 Apr; 24(2):463-80. PubMed ID: 9554094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Evidence of resource sharing in the psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm.
    Mittelstädt V; Mackenzie IG; Miller J
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2022 Nov; 48(11):1279-1293. PubMed ID: 36107664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Are processing limitations of visual attention and response selection subject to the same bottleneck in dual-tasks?
    Reimer CB; Strobach T; Frensch PA; Schubert T
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2015 May; 77(4):1052-69. PubMed ID: 25810162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. The source of execution-related dual-task interference: motor bottleneck or response monitoring?
    Bratzke D; Rolke B; Ulrich R
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2009 Oct; 35(5):1413-26. PubMed ID: 19803646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Response activation in overlapping tasks and the response-selection bottleneck.
    Schubert T; Fischer R; Stelzel C
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2008 Apr; 34(2):376-97. PubMed ID: 18377177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Separating limits on preparation versus online processing in multitasking paradigms: Evidence for resource models.
    Mittelstädt V; Miller J
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2017 Jan; 43(1):89-102. PubMed ID: 27808552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The role of the dorsal medial frontal cortex in central processing limitation: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study.
    Soutschek A; Taylor PC; Schubert T
    Exp Brain Res; 2016 Sep; 234(9):2447-55. PubMed ID: 27083589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Information continuity across the response selection bottleneck: early parallel Task 2 response activation contributes to overt Task 2 performance.
    Thomson SJ; Watter S
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2013 Jul; 75(5):934-53. PubMed ID: 23592183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Stimulus-response compatibility and psychological refractory period effects: implications for response selection.
    Lien MC; Proctor RW
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2002 Jun; 9(2):212-38. PubMed ID: 12120784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Action scheduling in multitasking: A multi-phase framework of response-order control.
    Pieczykolan A; Huestegge L
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2019 Jul; 81(5):1464-1487. PubMed ID: 30645728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Regarding time-sharing with convergent operations.
    Tsang PS
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2006 Feb; 121(2):137-75. PubMed ID: 16150414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.