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 *

117 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3374802)

  • 1. Attentional factors in the occurrence of stimulus-response compatibility effects.
    Verfaellie M; Bowers D; Heilman KM
    Neuropsychologia; 1988; 26(3):435-44. PubMed ID: 3374802
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Spatial compatibility effects on the same side of the body midline.
    Nicoletti R; Anzola GP; Luppino G; Rizzolatti G; Umiltà C
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1982 Oct; 8(5):664-73. PubMed ID: 6218228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Attentional focussing and spatial stimulus-response compatibility.
    Stoffer TH
    Psychol Res; 1991; 53(2):127-35. PubMed ID: 1946872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Stimulus-response compatibility between stimulated eye and response location: implications for attentional accounts of the Simon effect.
    Valle-Inclán F; Hackley SA; De Labra C
    Psychol Res; 2003 Nov; 67(4):240-3. PubMed ID: 12761624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Stimulus-response compatibility effects in go-no-go tasks: a dimensional overlap account.
    Shiu LP; Kornblum S
    Percept Psychophys; 1999 Nov; 61(8):1613-23. PubMed ID: 10598474
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Hand-hemispace spatial compatibility, precueing, and stimulus-onset asynchrony.
    Bradshaw JL; Willmott CJ; Umiltà C; Phillips JG; Bradshaw JA; Mattingley JB
    Psychol Res; 1994; 56(3):170-8. PubMed ID: 8008779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Hemispheric asymmetries in attentional control: implications for hand preference in sensorimotor tasks.
    Verfaellie M; Heilman KM
    Brain Cogn; 1990 Sep; 14(1):70-80. PubMed ID: 2223046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Spatial S-R compatibility with orthogonal stimulus-response relationship.
    Ehrenstein WH; Schroeder-Heister P; Heister G
    Percept Psychophys; 1989 Mar; 45(3):215-20. PubMed ID: 2710619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A Direct Comparison of Spatial Attention and Stimulus-Response Compatibility between Mice and Humans.
    Schnabel UH; Van der Bijl T; Roelfsema PR; Lorteije JAM
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2021 Apr; 33(5):771-783. PubMed ID: 34449840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Reversing the affordance effect: negative stimulus-response compatibility observed with images of graspable objects.
    Kostov K; Janyan A
    Cogn Process; 2015 Sep; 16 Suppl 1():287-91. PubMed ID: 26233530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Role of practice and stimulus-onset-asynchrony in modulating effects of stimulus repetition, category relation, and response compatibility in the Eriksen flanker task.
    Zhang H
    Percept Mot Skills; 1997 Jun; 84(3 Pt 1):1087-96. PubMed ID: 9172226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effects of multiple reference points in spatial stimulus-response compatibility.
    Lamberts K; Tavernier G; d'Ydewalle G
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 1992 Mar; 79(2):115-30. PubMed ID: 1598842
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Attentional and intentional cueing in a Simon task: an EEG-based approach.
    Wascher E; Wolber M
    Psychol Res; 2004 Feb; 68(1):18-30. PubMed ID: 12750887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Response-response compatibility during bimanual movements: evidence for the conceptual coding of action.
    Hazeltine E
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2005 Aug; 12(4):682-8. PubMed ID: 16447382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Brain-behavior relationships: evidence from practice effects in spatial stimulus-response compatibility.
    Iacoboni M; Woods RP; Mazziotta JC
    J Neurophysiol; 1996 Jul; 76(1):321-31. PubMed ID: 8836228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon effect: toward a conceptual clarification.
    Hasbroucq T; Guiard Y
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1991 Feb; 17(1):246-66. PubMed ID: 1826315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Stimulus-response compatibility and response preparation: effects on motor component of information processing for upper and lower limb responses.
    Kato Y; Endo H; Kizuka T; Asami T
    Percept Mot Skills; 2005 Dec; 101(3):684-94. PubMed ID: 16491672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Determining priority between attentional and referential-coding sources of the Simon effect through optokinetic stimulation.
    Figliozzi F; Silvetti M; Rubichi S; Doricchi F
    Neuropsychologia; 2010 Mar; 48(4):1011-5. PubMed ID: 19961865
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Hand to mouth: automatic imitation across effector systems.
    Leighton J; Heyes C
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2010 Oct; 36(5):1174-83. PubMed ID: 20731510
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The impact of stimulus and response variability on S-R correspondence effects.
    Wühr P; Biebl R; Ansorge U
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2008 May; 34(3):533-45. PubMed ID: 18444754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.