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 *

117 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30550725)

  • 1. Effects of Thinking Dispositions, General Ability, Numeracy, and Instructional Set on Judgments and Decision-Making.
    Klaczynski PA; Felmban W
    Psychol Rep; 2020 Apr; 123(2):341-370. PubMed ID: 30550725
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Whose statistical reasoning is facilitated by a causal structure intervention?
    McNair S; Feeney A
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2015 Feb; 22(1):258-64. PubMed ID: 24825305
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Causality in thought.
    Sloman SA; Lagnado D
    Annu Rev Psychol; 2015 Jan; 66():223-47. PubMed ID: 25061673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The effect of introspection on judgment and decision making is dependent on the quality of conscious thinking.
    Leisti T; Häkkinen J
    Conscious Cogn; 2016 May; 42():340-351. PubMed ID: 27131852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Numeracy and Risk Literacy: What Have We Learned so Far?
    Garcia-Retamero R; Sobkow A; Petrova D; Garrido D; Traczyk J
    Span J Psychol; 2019 Mar; 22():E10. PubMed ID: 30892170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Pitting intuitive and analytical thinking against each other: the case of transitivity.
    Rusou Z; Zakay D; Usher M
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2013 Jun; 20(3):608-14. PubMed ID: 23720102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Evaluating the cognitive reflection test as a measure of intuition/reflection, numeracy, and insight problem solving, and the implications for understanding real-world judgments and beliefs.
    Patel N; Baker SG; Scherer LD
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2019 Dec; 148(12):2129-2153. PubMed ID: 31021149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The effect of analytic and experiential modes of thought on moral judgment.
    Kvaran T; Nichols S; Sanfey A
    Prog Brain Res; 2013; 202():187-96. PubMed ID: 23317833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Belief inhibition during thinking: not always winning but at least taking part.
    De Neys W; Franssens S
    Cognition; 2009 Oct; 113(1):45-61. PubMed ID: 19703685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Logic, beliefs, and instruction: a test of the default interventionist account of belief bias.
    Handley SJ; Newstead SE; Trippas D
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2011 Jan; 37(1):28-43. PubMed ID: 21058879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A mediation model to explain decision making under conditions of risk among adolescents: the role of fluid intelligence and probabilistic reasoning.
    Donati MA; Panno A; Chiesi F; Primi C
    J Clin Exp Neuropsychol; 2014; 36(6):588-95. PubMed ID: 24873900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The logic-bias effect: The role of effortful processing in the resolution of belief-logic conflict.
    Howarth S; Handley SJ; Walsh C
    Mem Cognit; 2016 Feb; 44(2):330-49. PubMed ID: 26390872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Can cognitive psychological research on reasoning enhance the discussion around moral judgments?
    Bialek M; Terbeck S
    Cogn Process; 2016 Aug; 17(3):329-35. PubMed ID: 27016146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Thinking while talking: adults fail nonverbal false-belief reasoning.
    Newton AM; de Villiers JG
    Psychol Sci; 2007 Jul; 18(7):574-9. PubMed ID: 17614864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Negative valence can evoke a liberal response bias in syllogistic reasoning.
    Vartanian O; Nakashima A; Bouak F; Smith I; Baranski JV; Cheung B
    Cogn Process; 2013 Mar; 14(1):89-98. PubMed ID: 23011642
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Why is logic so likeable? A single-process account of argument evaluation with logic and liking judgments.
    Hayes BK; Wei P; Dunn JC; Stephens RG
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2020 Apr; 46(4):699-719. PubMed ID: 31343253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. What are standardized literacy and numeracy tests testing? Evidence of the domain-general contributions to students' standardized educational test performance.
    Howard SJ; Woodcock S; Ehrich J; Bokosmaty S
    Br J Educ Psychol; 2017 Mar; 87(1):108-122. PubMed ID: 27900770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Heuristics and biases: interactions among numeracy, ability, and reflectiveness predict normative responding.
    Klaczynski PA
    Front Psychol; 2014; 5():665. PubMed ID: 25071639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Counterfactual Thought.
    Byrne RM
    Annu Rev Psychol; 2016; 67():135-57. PubMed ID: 26393873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Impact of Psychopathy on Moral Judgments about Causing Fear and Physical Harm.
    Cardinale EM; Marsh AA
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(5):e0125708. PubMed ID: 25992566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.