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: 32292380)

  • 1. Increasing Perceptual Salience Diminishes the Motor Interference Effect From Dangerous Objects.
    Cao R; Cao G; Liu P
    Front Psychol; 2020; 11():580. PubMed ID: 32292380
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Response inhibition or evaluation of danger? An event-related potential study regarding the origin of the motor interference effect from dangerous objects.
    Liu P; Cao R; Chen X; Wang Y
    Brain Res; 2017 Jun; 1664():63-73. PubMed ID: 28365315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A sequential trial effect based on the motor interference effect from dangerous objects: An ERP study.
    Liu P; Wang X; Cao G; Li J; Zhang J; Cao R
    Brain Behav; 2018 Oct; 8(10):e01112. PubMed ID: 30176195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Motor inhibition impacts the motor interference effect of dangerous objects based on a prime-target grasping consistency judgment task.
    Liu P; Zheng J; Wang Y; Chen L; Lin L; Wang Y
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2023 Nov; 193():112248. PubMed ID: 37778535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Time-frequency analysis of event-related potentials associated with the origin of the motor interference effect from dangerous objects.
    Liu P
    Brain Res; 2018 Mar; 1682():44-53. PubMed ID: 29317288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Arousal modulates the motor interference effect stimulated by pictures of threatening animals.
    Cao G; Liu P
    PeerJ; 2021; 9():e10876. PubMed ID: 33614293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Imitation of Touching Dangerous Animals Triggers Motor Inhibition in a Primed Target Grasping-Categorization Task.
    Liu P; Zheng J; Wang J; Wang C; Wang Y; Lin L; Wang Y
    J Mot Behav; 2023; 55(4):410-422. PubMed ID: 37225178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Sequential Congruency Effects of Reverse Stroop Interference on Event-Related Potential Components for Go- and Nogo-Stimuli.
    Suzuki K
    Front Psychol; 2021; 12():678647. PubMed ID: 34393906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Response competition and response inhibition during different choice-discrimination tasks: evidence from ERP measured inside MRI scanner.
    Gonzalez-Rosa JJ; Inuggi A; Blasi V; Cursi M; Annovazzi P; Comi G; Falini A; Leocani L
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2013 Jul; 89(1):37-47. PubMed ID: 23664841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The Automaticity of Affordance of Dangerous Object.
    Zhao L
    Span J Psychol; 2016 Nov; 19():E74. PubMed ID: 27806742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The Effect of Prior Knowledge of Color on Behavioral Responses and Event-Related Potentials During Go/No-go Task.
    Kubo N; Watanabe T; Chen X; Matsumoto T; Yunoki K; Kuwabara T; Kirimoto H
    Front Hum Neurosci; 2021; 15():674964. PubMed ID: 34177494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Motor Inhibition to Dangerous Objects: Electrophysiological Evidence for Task-dependent Aversive Affordances.
    Mustile M; Giocondo F; Caligiore D; Borghi AM; Kourtis D
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2021 Apr; 33(5):826-839. PubMed ID: 34449846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Visuospatial information processing load and the ratio between parietal cue and target P3 amplitudes in the Attentional Network Test.
    Abramov DM; Pontes M; Pontes AT; Mourao-Junior CA; Vieira J; Quero Cunha C; Tamborino T; Galhanone PR; deAzevedo LC; Lazarev VV
    Neurosci Lett; 2017 Apr; 647():91-96. PubMed ID: 28336341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Keep away from danger: dangerous objects in dynamic and static situations.
    Anelli F; Nicoletti R; Bolzani R; Borghi AM
    Front Hum Neurosci; 2013; 7():344. PubMed ID: 23847512
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Different Stages, Different Signals: The Modulating Effect of Cognitive Conflict on Subsequent Processing.
    Pan F; Shi L; Zhang L; Lu Q; Xue S
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(9):e0163263. PubMed ID: 27636368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The Time Course of Response Activation with Dangerous Objects.
    Zhao L
    Span J Psychol; 2018 Jul; 21():E27. PubMed ID: 30056821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Semantic Incongruency Interferes With Endogenous Attention in Cross-Modal Integration of Semantically Congruent Objects.
    Spilcke-Liss J; Zhu J; Gluth S; Spezio M; Gläscher J
    Front Integr Neurosci; 2019; 13():53. PubMed ID: 31572138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Differential modulation of the N2 and P3 event-related potentials by response conflict and inhibition.
    Groom MJ; Cragg L
    Brain Cogn; 2015 Jul; 97():1-9. PubMed ID: 25955278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Electrophysiological evidence of low salience distractor interference during visual search.
    Fortier-Gauthier U; Jolicœur P
    Psychophysiology; 2018 Jul; 55(7):e13068. PubMed ID: 29423999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Grasping the pain: motor resonance with dangerous affordances.
    Anelli F; Borghi AM; Nicoletti R
    Conscious Cogn; 2012 Dec; 21(4):1627-39. PubMed ID: 23041720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.