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 *

155 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35122295)

  • 1. Causal Judgment in the Wild: Evidence from the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election.
    Quillien T; Barlev M
    Cogn Sci; 2022 Feb; 46(2):e13101. PubMed ID: 35122295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Toward a Developmental Science of Politics.
    Patterson MM; Bigler RS; Pahlke E; Brown CS; Hayes AR; Ramirez MC; Nelson A
    Monogr Soc Res Child Dev; 2019 Sep; 84(3):7-185. PubMed ID: 31503346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. When do we think that X caused Y?
    Quillien T
    Cognition; 2020 Dec; 205():104410. PubMed ID: 32768136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A definition of the causal effect of a political party's nominee on the U.S. general presidential election using counterfactual response types.
    Garber MD; Collin LJ; Dana Flanders W
    Ann Epidemiol; 2020 Jul; 47():4-7. PubMed ID: 32713506
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Counterfactual thinking and recency effects in causal judgment.
    Henne P; Kulesza A; Perez K; Houcek A
    Cognition; 2021 Jul; 212():104708. PubMed ID: 33819848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. What would have happened? Counterfactuals, hypotheticals and causal judgements.
    Gerstenberg T
    Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci; 2022 Dec; 377(1866):20210339. PubMed ID: 36314143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Double Prevention, Causal Judgments, and Counterfactuals.
    Henne P; O'Neill K
    Cogn Sci; 2022 May; 46(5):e13127. PubMed ID: 35488801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A counterfactual simulation model of causation by omission.
    Gerstenberg T; Stephan S
    Cognition; 2021 Nov; 216():104842. PubMed ID: 34303272
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. How an election loss leads to a social movement: Reactions to the 2016 U.S. presidential election among liberals predict later collective action and social movement identification.
    Bilali R; Godfrey EB; Freel SH
    Br J Soc Psychol; 2020 Jan; 59(1):227-247. PubMed ID: 31894871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Predicted and experienced affective responses to the outcome of the 2008 U.S. presidential election.
    Kitchens MB; Corser GC; Gohm CL; VonWaldner KL; Foreman EL
    Psychol Rep; 2010 Dec; 107(3):837-46. PubMed ID: 21323142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 280 characters to the White House: predicting 2020 U.S. presidential elections from twitter data.
    Rizk R; Rizk D; Rizk F; Hsu S
    Comput Math Organ Theory; 2023 Mar; ():1-28. PubMed ID: 37360912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A counterfactual simulation model of causal judgments for physical events.
    Gerstenberg T; Goodman ND; Lagnado DA; Tenenbaum JB
    Psychol Rev; 2021 Oct; 128(5):936-975. PubMed ID: 34096754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Calculated Comparisons: Manufacturing Societal Causal Judgments by Implying Different Counterfactual Outcomes.
    Amemiya J; Heyman GD; Walker CM
    Cogn Sci; 2024 Feb; 48(2):e13408. PubMed ID: 38323743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Racial attitudes and visual cues in political judgments: support for Obama during the 2008 presidential election.
    West TV; Pearson AR; Dovidio JF; Johnson BT; Phills CE
    Cultur Divers Ethnic Minor Psychol; 2014 Oct; 20(4):583-90. PubMed ID: 25090140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Motivated reasoning: Election integrity beliefs, outcome acceptance, and polarization before, during, and after the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election.
    Vail KE; Harvell-Bowman L; Lockett M; Pyszczynski T; Gilmore G
    Motiv Emot; 2023; 47(2):177-192. PubMed ID: 36188156
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Wishful thinking in the 2008 U.S. presidential election.
    Krizan Z; Miller JC; Johar O
    Psychol Sci; 2010 Jan; 21(1):140-6. PubMed ID: 20424035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. When election expectations fail: Polarized perceptions of election legitimacy increase with accumulating evidence of election outcomes and with polarized media.
    Grant MD; Flores A; Pedersen EJ; Sherman DK; Van Boven L
    PLoS One; 2021; 16(12):e0259473. PubMed ID: 34851979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Causal superseding.
    Kominsky JF; Phillips J; Gerstenberg T; Lagnado D; Knobe J
    Cognition; 2015 Apr; 137():196-209. PubMed ID: 25698516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. #Election2020: the first public Twitter dataset on the 2020 US Presidential election.
    Chen E; Deb A; Ferrara E
    J Comput Soc Sci; 2022; 5(1):1-18. PubMed ID: 33824934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Symbolic disempowerment and Donald Trump's 2016 presidential election: Mental health responses among Latinx and white populations.
    Morey BN; García SJ; Nieri T; Bruckner TA; Link BG
    Soc Sci Med; 2021 Nov; 289():114417. PubMed ID: 34656819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.