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 *

192 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31444699)

  • 1. Interference of irrelevant information in multisensory selection depends on attentional set.
    Jensen A; Merz S; Spence C; Frings C
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2020 Jun; 82(3):1176-1195. PubMed ID: 31444699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Perception it is: Processing level in multisensory selection.
    Jensen A; Merz S; Spence C; Frings C
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2020 Jun; 82(3):1391-1406. PubMed ID: 31429042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Multisensory distractor processing is modulated by spatial attention.
    Merz S; Jensen A; Spence C; Frings C
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2019 Oct; 45(10):1375-1388. PubMed ID: 31343245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Auditory and visual distractors disrupt multisensory temporal acuity in the crossmodal temporal order judgment task.
    Dean CL; Eggleston BA; Gibney KD; Aligbe E; Blackwell M; Kwakye LD
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(7):e0179564. PubMed ID: 28723907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Overt spatial attention modulates multisensory selection.
    Jensen A; Merz S; Spence C; Frings C
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2019 Feb; 45(2):174-188. PubMed ID: 30589358
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. When vision influences the invisible distractor: tactile response compatibility effects require vision.
    Wesslein AK; Spence C; Frings C
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2014 Apr; 40(2):763-74. PubMed ID: 24245501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Multisensory top-down sets: Evidence for contingent crossmodal capture.
    Mast F; Frings C; Spence C
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2015 Aug; 77(6):1970-85. PubMed ID: 25944449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Crossmodal attentional control sets between vision and audition.
    Mast F; Frings C; Spence C
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2017 Jul; 178():41-47. PubMed ID: 28575705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. When irrelevant information helps: Extending the Eriksen-flanker task into a multisensory world.
    Merz S; Frings C; Spence C
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2021 Feb; 83(2):776-789. PubMed ID: 32514664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Higher-Order Cognition Does Not Affect Multisensory Distractor Processing.
    Merz S; Jensen A; Burau C; Spence C; Frings C
    Multisens Res; 2020 Sep; 34(4):351-364. PubMed ID: 33706263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The contribution of response conflict, multisensory integration, and body-mediated attention to the crossmodal congruency effect.
    Marini F; Romano D; Maravita A
    Exp Brain Res; 2017 Mar; 235(3):873-887. PubMed ID: 27913817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Vision and touch in ageing: crossmodal selective attention and visuotactile spatial interactions.
    Poliakoff E; Ashworth S; Lowe C; Spence C
    Neuropsychologia; 2006; 44(4):507-17. PubMed ID: 16098997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Irrelevant sights and sounds require spatial suppression: ERP evidence.
    Lunn J; Berggren N; Ward J; Forster S
    Psychophysiology; 2023 Mar; 60(3):e14181. PubMed ID: 36114739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Multisensory interactions in saccade target selection: curved saccade trajectories.
    Doyle MC; Walker R
    Exp Brain Res; 2002 Jan; 142(1):116-30. PubMed ID: 11797089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A matter of attention: Crossmodal congruence enhances and impairs performance in a novel trimodal matching paradigm.
    Misselhorn J; Daume J; Engel AK; Friese U
    Neuropsychologia; 2016 Jul; 88():113-122. PubMed ID: 26209356
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Vision affects tactile target and distractor processing even when space is task-irrelevant.
    Wesslein AK; Spence C; Frings C
    Front Psychol; 2014; 5():84. PubMed ID: 24567727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Working memory load modulates the processing of audiovisual distractors: A behavioral and event-related potentials study.
    Yuan Y; He X; Yue Z
    Front Integr Neurosci; 2023; 17():1120668. PubMed ID: 36908504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Attentional capture by salient color singleton distractors is modulated by top-down dimensional set.
    Müller HJ; Geyer T; Zehetleitner M; Krummenacher J
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2009 Feb; 35(1):1-16. PubMed ID: 19170466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Separating after-effects of target and distractor processing in the tactile sensory modality.
    Wesslein AK; Moeller B; Frings C; Giesen C
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2019 Apr; 81(3):809-822. PubMed ID: 30628034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Top-Down Processes Override Bottom-Up Interference in the Flanker Task.
    Avital-Cohen R; Tsal Y
    Psychol Sci; 2016 May; 27(5):651-8. PubMed ID: 26993739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.