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 *

284 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30725377)

  • 1. Interpolated retrieval effects on list isolation: Individual differences in working memory capacity.
    Wahlheim CN; Alexander TR; Kane MJ
    Mem Cognit; 2019 May; 47(4):619-642. PubMed ID: 30725377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Individual differences in working memory capacity and search efficiency.
    Miller AL; Unsworth N
    Mem Cognit; 2018 Oct; 46(7):1149-1163. PubMed ID: 29845592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Working memory capacity and retrieval limitations from long-term memory: an examination of differences in accessibility.
    Unsworth N; Spillers GJ; Brewer GA
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2012; 65(12):2397-410. PubMed ID: 22800472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Working memory capacity and recall from long-term memory: Examining the influences of encoding strategies, study time allocation, search efficiency, and monitoring abilities.
    Unsworth N
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2016 Jan; 42(1):50-61. PubMed ID: 26076331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Working memory capacity and retrieval from long-term memory: the role of controlled search.
    Unsworth N; Brewer GA; Spillers GJ
    Mem Cognit; 2013 Feb; 41(2):242-54. PubMed ID: 23055120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Individual differences in working memory capacity predict retrieval-induced forgetting.
    Aslan A; Bäuml KH
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2011 Jan; 37(1):264-9. PubMed ID: 21090906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The contributions of primary and secondary memory to working memory capacity: an individual differences analysis of immediate free recall.
    Unsworth N; Spillers GJ; Brewer GA
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2010 Jan; 36(1):240-7. PubMed ID: 20053060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The Hebb repetition effect in simple and complex memory span.
    Oberauer K; Jones T; Lewandowsky S
    Mem Cognit; 2015 Aug; 43(6):852-65. PubMed ID: 25712915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Individual differences in working memory capacity and episodic retrieval: examining the dynamics of delayed and continuous distractor free recall.
    Unsworth N
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2007 Nov; 33(6):1020-34. PubMed ID: 17983310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Attentional refreshing moderates the word frequency effect in immediate and delayed recall tasks.
    Abadie M; Camos V
    Ann N Y Acad Sci; 2018 Jul; 1424(1):127-136. PubMed ID: 29756215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Short-term retention of a single word relies on retrieval from long-term memory when both rehearsal and refreshing are disrupted.
    Rose NS; Buchsbaum BR; Craik FI
    Mem Cognit; 2014 Jul; 42(5):689-700. PubMed ID: 24500778
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Levels of processing in working memory: differential involvement of frontotemporal networks.
    Rose NS; Craik FI; Buchsbaum BR
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2015 Mar; 27(3):522-32. PubMed ID: 25313657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. What makes working memory traces stable over time?
    Jarjat G; Hoareau V; Plancher G; Hot P; Lemaire B; Portrat S
    Ann N Y Acad Sci; 2018 Jul; 1424(1):149-160. PubMed ID: 29744891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Individual differences in working memory capacity determine the effects of oculomotor task load on concurrent word recall performance.
    Lee EJ; Kwon G; Lee A; Ghajar J; Suh M
    Brain Res; 2011 Jul; 1399():59-65. PubMed ID: 21645879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Variation in working memory capacity and episodic recall: the contributions of strategic encoding and contextual retrieval.
    Unsworth N; Spillers GJ
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2010 Apr; 17(2):200-5. PubMed ID: 20382920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Does collaboration help or hurt recall? The answer depends on working memory capacity.
    Hood AVB; Whillock SR; Meade ML; Hutchison KA
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2023 Mar; 49(3):350-370. PubMed ID: 36006719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Item-method directed forgetting and working memory capacity: A hierarchical multinomial modeling approach.
    Marevic I; Arnold NR; Rummel J
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2018 May; 71(5):1070-1080. PubMed ID: 28326968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The contribution of encoding and retrieval processes to proactive interference.
    Kliegl O; Pastötter B; Bäuml KH
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2015 Nov; 41(6):1778-89. PubMed ID: 25603166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Individual differences in long-term memory.
    Unsworth N
    Psychol Bull; 2019 Jan; 145(1):79-139. PubMed ID: 30596433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Working memory capacity and sustained attention: A cognitive-energetic perspective.
    Unsworth N; Robison MK
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2020 Jan; 46(1):77-103. PubMed ID: 30998072
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.