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 *

160 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30403368)

  • 1. Attentional Selection Mediates Framing and Risk-Bias Effects.
    Glickman M; Tsetsos K; Usher M
    Psychol Sci; 2018 Dec; 29(12):2010-2019. PubMed ID: 30403368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Working memory loads differentially influence frame-induced bias and normative choice in risky decision making.
    Hinson JM; Whitney P; Wilson CG; Nusbaum AT
    PLoS One; 2019; 14(3):e0214571. PubMed ID: 30921395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Confirmation Bias through Selective Overweighting of Choice-Consistent Evidence.
    Talluri BC; Urai AE; Tsetsos K; Usher M; Donner TH
    Curr Biol; 2018 Oct; 28(19):3128-3135.e8. PubMed ID: 30220502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The order of information processing alters economic gain-loss framing effects.
    Kwak Y; Huettel S
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2018 Jan; 182():46-54. PubMed ID: 29136516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The interplay between the importance of a decision and emotion in decision-making.
    Gosling CJ; Caparos S; Moutier S
    Cogn Emot; 2020 Sep; 34(6):1260-1270. PubMed ID: 32193991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Does the Superior Colliculus Control Perceptual Sensitivity or Choice Bias during Attention? Evidence from a Multialternative Decision Framework.
    Sridharan D; Steinmetz NA; Moore T; Knudsen EI
    J Neurosci; 2017 Jan; 37(3):480-511. PubMed ID: 28100734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Framing effects and risk-sensitive decision making.
    Mishra S; Gregson M; Lalumière ML
    Br J Psychol; 2012 Feb; 103(1):83-97. PubMed ID: 22229776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The composition of the choice set modulates probability weighting in risky decisions.
    Grubb MA; Li Y; Larisch R; Hartmann J; Gottlieb J; Levy I
    Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci; 2023 Jun; 23(3):666-677. PubMed ID: 36702993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Brain activation covaries with reported criminal behaviors when making risky choices: A fuzzy-trace theory approach.
    Reyna VF; Helm RK; Weldon RB; Shah PD; Turpin AG; Govindgari S
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2018 Jul; 147(7):1094-1109. PubMed ID: 29975093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Adaptive History Biases Result from Confidence-Weighted Accumulation of past Choices.
    Braun A; Urai AE; Donner TH
    J Neurosci; 2018 Mar; 38(10):2418-2429. PubMed ID: 29371318
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Investigating the origin and consequences of endogenous default options in repeated economic choices.
    Couto J; van Maanen L; Lebreton M
    PLoS One; 2020; 15(8):e0232385. PubMed ID: 32790729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Reason's Enemy Is Not Emotion: Engagement of Cognitive Control Networks Explains Biases in Gain/Loss Framing.
    Li R; Smith DV; Clithero JA; Venkatraman V; Carter RM; Huettel SA
    J Neurosci; 2017 Mar; 37(13):3588-3598. PubMed ID: 28264981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Choice history biases subsequent evidence accumulation.
    Urai AE; de Gee JW; Tsetsos K; Donner TH
    Elife; 2019 Jul; 8():. PubMed ID: 31264959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Framing From Experience: Cognitive Processes and Predictions of Risky Choice.
    Gonzalez C; Mehlhorn K
    Cogn Sci; 2016 Jul; 40(5):1163-91. PubMed ID: 27427284
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. On the Flexibility of Basic Risk Attitudes in Monkeys.
    Farashahi S; Azab H; Hayden B; Soltani A
    J Neurosci; 2018 May; 38(18):4383-4398. PubMed ID: 29626169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Goal-dependent flexibility in preferences formation from rapid payoff sequences.
    Brusovansky M; Liberman N; Usher M
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2019 Aug; 72(8):2130-2139. PubMed ID: 30744496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Rejection or selection: influence of framing in investment decisions.
    Cheng PY; Chiou WB
    Psychol Rep; 2010 Feb; 106(1):247-54. PubMed ID: 20402451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Beyond gains and losses: the effect of need on risky choice in framed decisions.
    Mishra S; Fiddick L
    J Pers Soc Psychol; 2012 Jun; 102(6):1136-47. PubMed ID: 22486678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Nonlinear probability weighting can reflect attentional biases in sequential sampling.
    Zilker V; Pachur T
    Psychol Rev; 2022 Oct; 129(5):949-975. PubMed ID: 34370495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Framing effects: behavioral dynamics and neural basis.
    Zheng H; Wang XT; Zhu L
    Neuropsychologia; 2010 Sep; 48(11):3198-204. PubMed ID: 20600178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.