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 *

107 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34333278)

  • 1. The effect of categorical superiority in subsequent search misses.
    Rubtsova O; Gorbunova ES
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2021 Sep; 219():103375. PubMed ID: 34333278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Perceptual similarity in visual search for multiple targets.
    Gorbunova ES
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2017 Feb; 173():46-54. PubMed ID: 28002721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. An individual differences approach to multiple-target visual search errors: How search errors relate to different characteristics of attention.
    Adamo SH; Cain MS; Mitroff SR
    Vision Res; 2017 Dec; 141():258-265. PubMed ID: 27919677
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The time course of categorical and perceptual similarity effects in visual search.
    Yeh LC; Peelen MV
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2022 Oct; 48(10):1069-1082. PubMed ID: 35951407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The Role of Working Memory in Dual-Target Visual Search.
    Gorbunova ES; Kozlov KS; Le STT; Makarov IM
    Front Psychol; 2019; 10():1673. PubMed ID: 31417449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. From "satisfaction of search" to "subsequent search misses": a review of multiple-target search errors across radiology and cognitive science.
    Adamo SH; Gereke BJ; Shomstein S; Schmidt J
    Cogn Res Princ Implic; 2021 Aug; 6(1):59. PubMed ID: 34455466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Examining perceptual and conceptual set biases in multiple-target visual search.
    Biggs AT; Adamo SH; Dowd EW; Mitroff SR
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2015 Apr; 77(3):844-55. PubMed ID: 25678271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A little bit of history repeating: Splitting up multiple-target visual searches decreases second-target miss errors.
    Cain MS; Biggs AT; Darling EF; Mitroff SR
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2014 Jun; 20(2):112-25. PubMed ID: 24708353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The Manifestation of Incidental Findings in Different Experimental Visual Search Paradigms.
    Rubtsova OS; Gorbunova ES
    Psychol Russ; 2022; 15(4):140-158. PubMed ID: 36761717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A novel, unbiased approach to evaluating subsequent search misses in dual target visual search.
    Becker MW; Anderson K; Brascamp JW
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2020 Oct; 82(7):3357-3373. PubMed ID: 32643106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The attentional template in high and low similarity search: Optimal tuning or tuning to relations?
    Hamblin-Frohman Z; Becker SI
    Cognition; 2021 Jul; 212():104732. PubMed ID: 33862440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Satisfaction in motion: Subsequent search misses are more likely in moving search displays.
    Stothart C; Clement A; Brockmole JR
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2018 Feb; 25(1):409-415. PubMed ID: 28484947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Targets Need Their Own Personal Space: Effects of Clutter on Multiple-Target Search Accuracy.
    Adamo SH; Cain MS; Mitroff SR
    Perception; 2015; 44(10):1203-14. PubMed ID: 26562889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Self-induced attentional blink: a cause of errors in multiple-target search.
    Adamo SH; Cain MS; Mitroff SR
    Psychol Sci; 2013 Dec; 24(12):2569-74. PubMed ID: 24142814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Spatially Specific Attention Mechanisms Are Sensitive to Competition during Visual Search.
    Yeh LC; Yeh YY; Kuo BC
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2019 Aug; 31(8):1248-1259. PubMed ID: 31037989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Visual search errors are persistent in a laboratory analog of the incidental finding problem.
    Nartker MS; Alaoui-Soce A; Wolfe JM
    Cogn Res Princ Implic; 2020 Jul; 5(1):32. PubMed ID: 32728864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The time course of similarity effects in visual search.
    Guest D; Lamberts K
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2011 Dec; 37(6):1667-88. PubMed ID: 22004196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. More is better: Relative prevalence of multiple targets affects search accuracy.
    Cheng PX; Rich AN
    J Vis; 2018 Apr; 18(4):2. PubMed ID: 29614156
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A neural signature of rapid category-based target selection as a function of intra-item perceptual similarity, despite inter-item dissimilarity.
    Wu R; Pruitt Z; Runkle M; Scerif G; Aslin RN
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2016 Apr; 78(3):749-60. PubMed ID: 26732265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Visual search strategy and perceptual organization covary with individual preference and structural complexity.
    Hogeboom M; van Leeuwen C
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 1997 Feb; 95(2):141-64. PubMed ID: 9062062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.