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 *

200 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32077740)

  • 1. Does feature-based attention play a role in the episodic retrieval of event files?
    Huffman G; Hilchey MD; Weidler BJ; Mills M; Pratt J
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2020 Mar; 46(3):241-251. PubMed ID: 32077740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Intervening response events between identification targets do not always turn repetition benefits into repetition costs.
    Hilchey MD; Rajsic J; Huffman G; Pratt J
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2017 Apr; 79(3):807-819. PubMed ID: 28063136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Distractor repetitions retrieve previous responses and previous targets: experimental dissociations of distractor-response and distractor-target bindings.
    Giesen C; Rothermund K
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2014 May; 40(3):645-659. PubMed ID: 24294915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Binding time: Investigations on the integration of visual stimulus duration.
    Köllnberger K; Bogon J; Dreisbach G
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2023 Oct; 76(10):2312-2328. PubMed ID: 36377802
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The effect of episodic retrieval on inhibition in task switching.
    Grange JA; Kowalczyk AW; O'Loughlin R
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2017 Aug; 43(8):1568-1583. PubMed ID: 28383961
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Is attention really biased toward the last target location in visual search? The role of focal attention and stimulus-response translation rules.
    Hilchey MD; Pratt J; Lamy D
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2019 Oct; 45(10):1415-1428. PubMed ID: 31343242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Task sets serve as boundaries for the congruency sequence effect.
    Grant LD; Cookson SL; Weissman DH
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2020 Aug; 46(8):798-812. PubMed ID: 32324028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Why star retrieves scar: Binding and retrieval of perceptual distractor features.
    Laub R; Frings C
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2020 Feb; 46(2):350-363. PubMed ID: 31180703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The representational basis of positive and negative repetition effects.
    Cochrane BA; Milliken B
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2020 Mar; 46(3):252-263. PubMed ID: 31697156
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Repetition or alternation of context influences sequential congruency effect depending on the presence of contingency.
    Atalay NB; Inan AB
    Psychol Res; 2017 Mar; 81(2):490-507. PubMed ID: 26908247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Salience drives non-spatial feature repetition effects in cueing tasks.
    Huffman G; Al-Aidroos N; Pratt J
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2017 Jan; 79(1):212-222. PubMed ID: 27743261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Reconciling cognitive-control and episodic-retrieval accounts of sequential conflict modulation: Binding of control-states into event-files.
    Dignath D; Johannsen L; Hommel B; Kiesel A
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2019 Sep; 45(9):1265-1270. PubMed ID: 31380673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Multiple cueing dissociates location- and feature-based repetition effects.
    Hu K; Zhan J; Li B; He S; Samuel AG
    Vision Res; 2014 Aug; 101():73-81. PubMed ID: 24907677
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Parietal Representations of Stimulus Features Are Amplified during Memory Retrieval and Flexibly Aligned with Top-Down Goals.
    Favila SE; Samide R; Sweigart SC; Kuhl BA
    J Neurosci; 2018 Sep; 38(36):7809-7821. PubMed ID: 30054390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Further studies on the role of attention and stimulus repetition in item-item binding processes in visual working memory.
    Peterson DJ; Decker R; Naveh-Benjamin M
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2019 Jan; 45(1):56-70. PubMed ID: 30024264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Feature binding and episodic retrieval in blindness for congruent stimuli: evidence from analyses of sequential congruency.
    Oriet C; Stevanovski B; Jolicoeur P
    Psychol Res; 2007 Jan; 71(1):30-41. PubMed ID: 16365783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Comparing partial repetition costs in two- and four-choice tasks: Evidence for abstract relational codes.
    Hazeltine E; Koch I; Weissman DH
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2024 Jul; 50(7):1133-1151. PubMed ID: 38095953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Modulation of Event-related Potentials of Visual Discrimination by Meditation Training and Sustained Attention.
    Zanesco AP; King BG; Powers C; De Meo R; Wineberg K; MacLean KA; Saron CD
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2019 Aug; 31(8):1184-1204. PubMed ID: 31059348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.