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 *

181 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33704373)

  • 21. Selective impairment of masked priming in dual-task performance.
    Fischer R; Kiesel A; Kunde W; Schubert T
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2011 Mar; 64(3):572-95. PubMed ID: 20839135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Reciprocal semantic predictions drive categorization of scene contexts and objects even when they are separate.
    Leroy A; Faure S; Spotorno S
    Sci Rep; 2020 May; 10(1):8447. PubMed ID: 32439874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The influence of metacontrast masking on detection and spatial-choice judgments: an apparent distinction between automatic and attentive response mechanisms.
    Proctor RW; Nunn MB; Pallos I
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1983 Apr; 9(2):278-87. PubMed ID: 6221072
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Can attention select only a fixed number of objects at a time?
    Davis G; Welch VL; Holmes A; Shepherd A
    Perception; 2001; 30(10):1227-48. PubMed ID: 11721824
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Intertrial repetition affects perception: the role of focused attention.
    Yashar A; Lamy D
    J Vis; 2010 Dec; 10(14):3. PubMed ID: 21131563
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Priming effects of a peripheral visual stimulus in simple and go/no-go tasks.
    Squella SA; Ribeiro-Do-Valle LE
    Braz J Med Biol Res; 2003 Feb; 36(2):247-61. PubMed ID: 12563528
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Are processing limitations of visual attention and response selection subject to the same bottleneck in dual-tasks?
    Reimer CB; Strobach T; Frensch PA; Schubert T
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2015 May; 77(4):1052-69. PubMed ID: 25810162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The neural basis of perceptual hypothesis generation and testing.
    Weidner R; Shah NJ; Fink GR
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2006 Feb; 18(2):258-66. PubMed ID: 16494685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Priming makes a stimulus more salient.
    Theeuwes J; Van der Burg E
    J Vis; 2013 Aug; 13(3):. PubMed ID: 23912065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Concurrent deployment of visual attention and response selection bottleneck in a dual-task: Electrophysiological and behavioural evidence.
    Reimer CB; Strobach T; Schubert T
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2017 Dec; 70(12):2460-2477. PubMed ID: 27734768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Visual selective behavior can be triggered by a feed-forward process.
    VanRullen R; Koch C
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2003 Feb; 15(2):209-17. PubMed ID: 12676058
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Effect of attention on the detection and identification of masked spatial patterns.
    Põder E
    Perception; 2005; 34(3):305-18. PubMed ID: 15895629
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Preattentive visual search and perceptual grouping in schizophrenia.
    Carr VJ; Dewis SA; Lewin TJ
    Psychiatry Res; 1998 Jun; 79(2):151-62. PubMed ID: 9705053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Vanishing dual-task interference after practice: has the bottleneck been eliminated or is it merely latent?
    Ruthruff E; Johnston JC; Van Selst M; Whitsell S; Remington R
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2003 Apr; 29(2):280-9. PubMed ID: 12760615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The representation of shape in the context of visual object categorization tasks.
    Op de Beeck H; Béatse E; Wagemans J; Sunaert S; Van Hecke P
    Neuroimage; 2000 Jul; 12(1):28-40. PubMed ID: 10875900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. On the locus of dual-task interference: Is there a bottleneck at the stimulus classification stage?
    Johnston JC; McCann RS
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2006 Apr; 59(4):694-719. PubMed ID: 16707358
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Cueing effects on semantic and perceptual categorization: ERPs reveal differential effects of validity as a function of processing stage.
    Lai G; Mangels JA
    Neuropsychologia; 2007 May; 45(9):2038-50. PubMed ID: 17382975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Does the identification of simple features require serial processing?
    Folk CL; Egeth H
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1989 Feb; 15(1):97-110. PubMed ID: 2522536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Controlling the unconscious: attentional task sets modulate subliminal semantic and visuomotor processes differentially.
    Martens U; Ansorge U; Kiefer M
    Psychol Sci; 2011 Feb; 22(2):282-91. PubMed ID: 21245492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Differential impact of attention on the early and late categorization related human brain potentials.
    Nasr S
    J Vis; 2010 Sep; 10(11):18. PubMed ID: 20884513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.