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 *

155 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30802076)

  • 1. Independent recollection/familiarity ratings can dissociate: Evidence from the effects of test context on recognition of event details.
    Willems S; Schroyen S; Dehon H; Bodner GE
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2019 Jun; 73(2):100-104. PubMed ID: 30802076
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Independent recollection-familiarity ratings: Similar effects of levels-of-processing whether amount or confidence is rated.
    Williams HL; Bodner GE
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2019 Jun; 73(2):94-99. PubMed ID: 30802078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Test context affects recollection and familiarity ratings: implications for measuring recognition experiences.
    Tousignant C; Bodner GE
    Conscious Cogn; 2012 Jun; 21(2):994-1000. PubMed ID: 22309813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effects of context on recollection and familiarity experiences are task dependent.
    Tousignant C; Bodner GE; Arnold MM
    Conscious Cogn; 2015 May; 33():78-89. PubMed ID: 25543993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparing recollection and nonrecollection memory states for recall of general knowledge: A nontrivial pursuit.
    Pereverseff RS; Bodner GE
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2020 Nov; 46(11):2207-2225. PubMed ID: 32658545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Source retrieval under cueing: Dissociated effects on accuracy versus confidence.
    Jaeger A; Queiroz MC; Selmeczy D; Dobbins IG
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2020 Aug; 46(8):1477-1493. PubMed ID: 32105146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Dissociation between the neural correlates of recollection and familiarity in the striatum and hippocampus: Across-study convergence.
    King DR; Chastelaine M; Elward RL; Wang TH; Rugg MD
    Behav Brain Res; 2018 Nov; 354():1-7. PubMed ID: 28803854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Recollection and familiarity make independent contributions to memory judgments.
    Evans LH; Wilding EL
    J Neurosci; 2012 May; 32(21):7253-7. PubMed ID: 22623670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A role for familiarity in supporting the testing effect over time.
    Shaffer RA; McDermott KB
    Neuropsychologia; 2020 Feb; 138():107298. PubMed ID: 31838098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Impaired capacity for familiarity after hippocampal damage.
    Song Z; Wixted JT; Hopkins RO; Squire LR
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2011 Jun; 108(23):9655-60. PubMed ID: 21606344
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Familiarity, but not recollection, supports the between-subject production effect in recognition memory.
    Fawcett JM; Ozubko JD
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2016 Jun; 70(2):99-115. PubMed ID: 27244352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Recollection and familiarity in schizophrenia: a quantitative review.
    Libby LA; Yonelinas AP; Ranganath C; Ragland JD
    Biol Psychiatry; 2013 May; 73(10):944-50. PubMed ID: 23245761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Varieties of recollective experience.
    Kihlstrom JF
    Neuropsychologia; 2020 Feb; 137():107295. PubMed ID: 31811844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Remembering is in the details: effects of test-list context on memory for an event.
    Bodner GE; Richardson-Champion DD
    Memory; 2007 Oct; 15(7):718-29. PubMed ID: 17885991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Is all metamemory monitoring spared from aging? A dual-process examination.
    Kuhlmann BG; Undorf M
    Psychol Aging; 2018 Dec; 33(8):1152-1167. PubMed ID: 30550332
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Dissociation of the neural correlates of recognition memory according to familiarity, recollection, and amount of recollected information.
    Vilberg KL; Rugg MD
    Neuropsychologia; 2007 Jun; 45(10):2216-25. PubMed ID: 17449068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Decoding the content of recollection within the core recollection network and beyond.
    Thakral PP; Wang TH; Rugg MD
    Cortex; 2017 Jun; 91():101-113. PubMed ID: 28077212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. False recollection of the role played by an actor in an event.
    Kersten AW; Earles JL; Upshaw C
    Mem Cognit; 2013 Nov; 41(8):1144-58. PubMed ID: 23722927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Free recall test experience potentiates strategy-driven effects of value on memory.
    Cohen MS; Rissman J; Hovhannisyan M; Castel AD; Knowlton BJ
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2017 Oct; 43(10):1581-1601. PubMed ID: 28394160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Dynamics of brain activity reveal a unitary recognition signal.
    Weidemann CT; Kahana MJ
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2019 Mar; 45(3):440-451. PubMed ID: 30024265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.