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 *

359 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31580121)

  • 1. Interacting congruency effects in the hybrid Stroop-Simon task prevent conclusions regarding the domain specificity or generality of the congruency sequence effect.
    Weissman DH
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2020 May; 46(5):945-967. PubMed ID: 31580121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Registered Replication Report of Weissman, D. H., Jiang, J., & Egner, T. (2014). Determinants of congruency sequence effects without learning and memory confounds.
    Gyurkovics M; Kovacs M; Jaquiery M; Palfi B; Dechterenko F; Aczel B
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2020 Nov; 82(8):3777-3787. PubMed ID: 32935289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The influence of reward in the Simon task: Differences and similarities to the Stroop and Eriksen flanker tasks.
    Mittelstädt V; Ulrich R; König J; Hofbauer K; Mackenzie IG
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2023 Apr; 85(3):949-959. PubMed ID: 36316615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The congruency sequence effect is modulated by the similarity of conflicts.
    Yang G; Xu H; Li Z; Nan W; Wu H; Li Q; Liu X
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2021 Oct; 47(10):1705-1719. PubMed ID: 34672662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Control processes through the suppression of the automatic response activation triggered by task-irrelevant information in the Simon-type tasks.
    Kim S; Lee SH; Cho YS
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2015 Nov; 162():51-61. PubMed ID: 26479902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Event-related potential indices of congruency sequence effects without feature integration or contingency learning confounds.
    Larson MJ; Clayson PE; Kirwan CB; Weissman DH
    Psychophysiology; 2016 Jun; 53(6):814-22. PubMed ID: 26854028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effects of conflict trial proportion: A comparison of the Eriksen and Simon tasks.
    Bausenhart KM; Ulrich R; Miller J
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2021 Feb; 83(2):810-836. PubMed ID: 33269440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. When awareness gets in the way: Reactivation aversion effects resolve the generality/specificity paradox in sensorimotor interference tasks.
    Schlaghecken F; Maylor EA
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2020 Nov; 149(11):2020-2045. PubMed ID: 32191081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Congruency sequence effect in cross-task context: evidence for dimension-specific modulation.
    Lee J; Cho YS
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2013 Nov; 144(3):617-27. PubMed ID: 24184348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Generality and specificity in cognitive control: conflict adaptation within and across selective-attention tasks but not across selective-attention and Simon tasks.
    Freitas AL; Clark SL
    Psychol Res; 2015 Jan; 79(1):143-62. PubMed ID: 24487727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The role of task-relevant and task-irrelevant information in congruency sequence effects: Applying the diffusion model for conflict tasks.
    Koob V; Mackenzie I; Ulrich R; Leuthold H; Janczyk M
    Cogn Psychol; 2023 Feb; 140():101528. PubMed ID: 36584549
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Congruency sequence effects without feature integration or contingency learning confounds.
    Schmidt JR; Weissman DH
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(7):e102337. PubMed ID: 25019526
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Dynamic adjustments of attentional control in healthy aging.
    Aschenbrenner AJ; Balota DA
    Psychol Aging; 2017 Feb; 32(1):1-15. PubMed ID: 28182494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Conflict-specific effects of accessory stimuli on cognitive control in the Stroop task and the Simon task.
    Soutschek A; Müller HJ; Schubert T
    Exp Psychol; 2013; 60(2):140-7. PubMed ID: 23128585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Going, going, gone? Proactive control prevents the congruency sequence effect from rapid decay.
    Duthoo W; Abrahamse EL; Braem S; Notebaert W
    Psychol Res; 2014 Jul; 78(4):483-93. PubMed ID: 24077774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Contextual within-trial adaptation of cognitive control: Evidence from the combination of conflict tasks.
    Rey-Mermet A; Gade M
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2016 Oct; 42(10):1505-32. PubMed ID: 27149295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Sequential conflict resolution under multiple concurrent conflicts: An ERP study.
    Rey-Mermet A; Gade M; Steinhauser M
    Neuroimage; 2019 Mar; 188():411-418. PubMed ID: 30562575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Both congruent and incongruent trials drive the congruency sequence effect: Novel support for an episodic retrieval view of adaptive control in the prime-probe task.
    Dunaway MG; Weissman DH
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2024 Apr; ():. PubMed ID: 38647457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Adaptation to conflict frequency without contingency and temporal learning: Evidence from the picture-word interference task.
    Spinelli G; Perry JR; Lupker SJ
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2019 Aug; 45(8):995-1014. PubMed ID: 31144859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Congruency sequence effects are driven by previous-trial congruency, not previous-trial response conflict.
    Weissman DH; Carp J
    Front Psychol; 2013; 4():587. PubMed ID: 24027550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 18.