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 *

125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32409922)

  • 1. Extension of the dual-memory model of test-enhanced learning to distributions and individual differences.
    Rickard TC
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2020 Aug; 27(4):783-790. PubMed ID: 32409922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A dual memory theory of the testing effect.
    Rickard TC; Pan SC
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2018 Jun; 25(3):847-869. PubMed ID: 28585057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Prior episodic learning and the efficacy of retrieval practice.
    Gupta MW; Pan SC; Rickard TC
    Mem Cognit; 2022 May; 50(4):722-735. PubMed ID: 34545540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Examining variation in working memory capacity and retrieval in cued recall.
    Unsworth N
    Memory; 2009 May; 17(4):386-96. PubMed ID: 19358013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. When does testing enhance retention? A distribution-based interpretation of retrieval as a memory modifier.
    Halamish V; Bjork RA
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2011 Jul; 37(4):801-12. PubMed ID: 21480751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Does testing increase spontaneous mediation in learning semantically related paired associates?
    Cho KW; Neely JH; Brennan MK; Vitrano D; Crocco S
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2017 Nov; 43(11):1768-1778. PubMed ID: 28394159
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. What types of learning are enhanced by a cued recall test?
    Carpenter SK; Pashler H; Vul E
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2006 Oct; 13(5):826-30. PubMed ID: 17328380
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Testing the primary and convergent retrieval model of recall: Recall practice produces faster recall success but also faster recall failure.
    Hopper WJ; Huber DE
    Mem Cognit; 2019 May; 47(4):816-841. PubMed ID: 30737729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Feedback enhances the positive effects and reduces the negative effects of multiple-choice testing.
    Butler AC; Roediger HL
    Mem Cognit; 2008 Apr; 36(3):604-16. PubMed ID: 18491500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Mechanisms of output interference in cued recall.
    Wilson JH; Kellen D; Criss AH
    Mem Cognit; 2020 Jan; 48(1):51-68. PubMed ID: 31297701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Mnemonic benefits of retrieval practice at short retention intervals.
    Rowland CA; DeLosh EL
    Memory; 2015; 23(3):403-19. PubMed ID: 24579674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Conditions of highly specific learning through cued recall.
    Pan SC; Lovelett J; Stoeckenius D; Rickard TC
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2019 Apr; 26(2):634-640. PubMed ID: 30937830
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Successive tests of pair recognition.
    Sikström SP
    Memory; 1998 Sep; 6(5):531-54. PubMed ID: 10197162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Specificity of learning through memory retrieval practice: the case of addition and subtraction.
    Bajic D; Kwak J; Rickard TC
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2011 Dec; 18(6):1148-55. PubMed ID: 21874400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Contracting, equal, and expanding learning schedules: the optimal distribution of learning sessions depends on retention interval.
    Küpper-Tetzel CE; Kapler IV; Wiseheart M
    Mem Cognit; 2014 Jul; 42(5):729-41. PubMed ID: 24500777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Cued recall from image and sentence memory: a shift from episodic to identical elements representation.
    Rickard TC; Bajic D
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2006 Jul; 32(4):734-48. PubMed ID: 16822144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Working memory capacity and retrieval limitations from long-term memory: an examination of differences in accessibility.
    Unsworth N; Spillers GJ; Brewer GA
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2012; 65(12):2397-410. PubMed ID: 22800472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparing word fragment completion and cued recall with letter cues.
    Nelson DL; Canas JJ; Bajo MT; Keelean PD
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 1987 Oct; 13(4):542-52. PubMed ID: 2959738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The dark side of corrective feedback: Controlled and automatic influences of retrieval practice.
    Alamri A; Higham PA
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2022 May; 48(5):752-768. PubMed ID: 35389700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Selective access in cued recall: the roles of retrieval cues and domains of encoding.
    McEvoy CL; Nelson DL
    Mem Cognit; 1990 Jan; 18(1):15-22. PubMed ID: 2314223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.