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 *

123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33636571)

  • 1. Does high state anxiety exacerbate distractor interference?
    Roberts JW; Lawrence GP; Welsh TN; Wilson MR
    Hum Mov Sci; 2021 Apr; 76():102773. PubMed ID: 33636571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Temporal dissociation between distractors and targets: the impact of residual distractor processing on target responses.
    Kritikos A; McNeill J; Pavlis A
    J Mot Behav; 2008 Jan; 40(1):29-42. PubMed ID: 18316295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Learning What Is Irrelevant or Relevant: Expectations Facilitate Distractor Inhibition and Target Facilitation through Distinct Neural Mechanisms.
    van Moorselaar D; Slagter HA
    J Neurosci; 2019 Aug; 39(35):6953-6967. PubMed ID: 31270162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Investigating cognitive load modulation of distractor processing using pupillary luminance responses in the anti-saccade paradigm.
    Hsu YF; Baird T; Wang CA
    Eur J Neurosci; 2020 Aug; 52(3):3061-3073. PubMed ID: 32277727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Low cognitive load strengthens distractor interference while high load attenuates when cognitive load and distractor possess similar visual characteristics.
    Minamoto T; Shipstead Z; Osaka N; Engle RW
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2015 Jul; 77(5):1659-73. PubMed ID: 25813738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The influence of threat on the efficiency of goal-directed attentional control.
    Kim AJ; Lee DS; Anderson BA
    Psychol Res; 2021 Apr; 85(3):980-986. PubMed ID: 32222868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. "Strategic control over extent and timing of distractor-based response activation": Correction to Jost et al. (2017).
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2017 Apr; 43(4):564. PubMed ID: 28368156
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Stimuli that signal the availability of reward break into attentional focus.
    Wang L; Li S; Zhou X; Theeuwes J
    Vision Res; 2018 Mar; 144():20-28. PubMed ID: 29408161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Differences in the strength of distractor inhibition do not affect distractor-response bindings.
    Giesen C; Frings C; Rothermund K
    Mem Cognit; 2012 Apr; 40(3):373-87. PubMed ID: 22081277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Distractors less salient than targets capture attention rather than producing non-spatial filtering costs.
    Koch AI; Müller HJ; Zehetleitner M
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2013 Sep; 144(1):61-72. PubMed ID: 23747508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Cueing distraction: electrophysiological evidence for anticipatory active suppression of distractor location.
    Heuer A; Schubö A
    Psychol Res; 2020 Nov; 84(8):2111-2121. PubMed ID: 31201532
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Selective target processing: perceptual load or distractor salience?
    Eltiti S; Wallace D; Fox E
    Percept Psychophys; 2005 Jul; 67(5):876-85. PubMed ID: 16334059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Reward breaks through the inhibitory region around attentional focus.
    Wang L; Duan Y; Theeuwes J; Zhou X
    J Vis; 2014 Oct; 14(12):. PubMed ID: 25280985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Independent control processes? Evidence for concurrent distractor inhibition and attentional usage of distractor information.
    Gillich IM; Jacobsen T; Tomat M; Wendt M
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2019 Jul; 198():102879. PubMed ID: 31301574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evidence inhibition responds reactively to the salience of distracting information during focused attention.
    Wyatt N; Machado L
    PLoS One; 2013; 8(4):e62809. PubMed ID: 23646147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Distractor interference during a choice limb reaching task.
    Ray M; Weeks D; Welsh TN
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(1):e85961. PubMed ID: 24465813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Attentional focus, processing load, and Stroop interference.
    Chen Z
    Percept Psychophys; 2003 Aug; 65(6):888-900. PubMed ID: 14528898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Processing overlap-dependent distractor dilution rather than perceptual target load determines attentional selectivity.
    Tan J; Yin S; Wang L; Chen A; Egner T
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2018 Nov; 80(8):2048-2059. PubMed ID: 29968079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The visual properties of proximal and remote distractors differentially influence reaching planning times: evidence from pro- and antipointing tasks.
    Heath M; DeSimone JC
    Exp Brain Res; 2016 Nov; 234(11):3259-3268. PubMed ID: 27405998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.