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 *

164 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30725390)

  • 1. The impact of cue format and cue transparency on task switching performance.
    Gade M; Steinhauser M
    Psychol Res; 2020 Jul; 84(5):1346-1369. PubMed ID: 30725390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Cue-switch costs in task-switching: cue priming or control processes?
    Grange JA; Houghton G
    Psychol Res; 2010 Sep; 74(5):481-90. PubMed ID: 20037766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Investigating a method for reducing residual switch costs in cued task switching.
    Schneider DW
    Mem Cognit; 2016 Jul; 44(5):762-77. PubMed ID: 26833200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Exploring individual differences in task switching.
    Li B; Li X; Stoet G; Lages M
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2019 Feb; 193():80-95. PubMed ID: 30599293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A new account of the effect of probability on task switching: ERP evidence following the manipulation of switch probability, cue informativeness and predictability.
    Nessler D; Friedman D; Johnson R
    Biol Psychol; 2012 Oct; 91(2):245-62. PubMed ID: 22820040
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Differential effects of articulatory suppression on cue-switch and task-switch trials in random task cueing with 2:1 mapping.
    Saeki E; Saito S
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2012; 65(8):1599-614. PubMed ID: 22506894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Cognitive control in cued task switching with transition cues: cue processing, task processing, and cue-task transition congruency.
    Van Loy B; Liefooghe B; Vandierendonck A
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2010 Oct; 63(10):1916-35. PubMed ID: 20574933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Preparing a task is sufficient to generate a subsequent task-switch cost affecting task performance.
    Swainson R; Prosser LJ; Yamaguchi M
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2024 Jan; 50(1):39-51. PubMed ID: 37498704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Partitioning switch costs when investigating task switching in relation to media multitasking.
    Schneider DW; Chun H
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2021 Jun; 28(3):910-917. PubMed ID: 33634358
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Setting goals to switch between tasks: effect of cue transparency on children's cognitive flexibility.
    Chevalier N; Blaye A
    Dev Psychol; 2009 May; 45(3):782-97. PubMed ID: 19413431
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Controlling response order without relying on stimulus order - evidence for flexible representations of task order.
    Kürten J; Strobach T; Huestegge L
    Psychol Res; 2024 Jul; 88(5):1712-1726. PubMed ID: 38613570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Exploring the switching of the focus of attention within working memory: A combined event-related potential and behavioral study.
    Frenken M; Berti S
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2018 Apr; 126():30-41. PubMed ID: 29476873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Inhibition of cued but not executed task sets depends on cue-task compatibility and practice.
    Berger A; Koch I; Kiefer M
    Psychol Res; 2024 Oct; 88(7):2036-2058. PubMed ID: 39080024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Incorrect predictions reduce switch costs.
    Kleinsorge T; Scheil J
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2015 Jul; 159():52-60. PubMed ID: 26024967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. After-effects without monitoring costs: The impact of prospective memory instructions on task switching performance.
    Meier B; Rey-Mermet A
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2018 Mar; 184():85-99. PubMed ID: 28477841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The influence of cue-task association and location on switch cost and alternating-switch cost.
    Arbuthnott KD; Woodward TS
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2002 Mar; 56(1):18-29. PubMed ID: 11901958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Explaining response-repetition effects in task switching: evidence from switching cue modality suggests episodic binding and response inhibition.
    Koch I; Frings C; Schuch S
    Psychol Res; 2018 May; 82(3):570-579. PubMed ID: 28286905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effect of performing versus preparing a task on the subsequent switch cost.
    Swainson R; Prosser L; Karavasilev K; Romanczuk A
    Psychol Res; 2021 Feb; 85(1):364-383. PubMed ID: 31624918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Examining binding effects on task switch costs and response-repetition effects: Variations of the cue modality and stimulus modality in task switching.
    Kandalowski SRM; Seibold JC; Schuch S; Koch I
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2020 May; 82(4):1632-1643. PubMed ID: 31820281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Task-set switching under cue-based versus memory-based switching conditions in younger and older adults.
    Kray J
    Brain Res; 2006 Aug; 1105(1):83-92. PubMed ID: 16387284
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.