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 *

138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35130015)

  • 1. Does it help to expect distraction? Attentional capture is attenuated by high distractor frequency but not by trial-to-trial predictability.
    Bogaerts L; van Moorselaar D; Theeuwes J
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2022 Mar; 48(3):246-261. PubMed ID: 35130015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evidence for second-order singleton suppression based on probabilistic expectations.
    Won BY; Kosoyan M; Geng JJ
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2019 Jan; 45(1):125-138. PubMed ID: 30596437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Intertrial priming due to distractor repetition is eliminated in homogeneous contexts.
    Feldmann-Wüstefeld T; Schubö A
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2016 Oct; 78(7):1935-47. PubMed ID: 27165171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Feature-based statistical regularities of distractors modulate attentional capture.
    Stilwell BT; Bahle B; Vecera SP
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2019 Mar; 45(3):419-433. PubMed ID: 30802131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Habituation to onsets is controlled by spatially selective distractor expectation.
    Turatto M; Valsecchi M
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2023 Jan; 49(1):145-158. PubMed ID: 36395053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Attentional capture during visual search is attenuated by target predictability: evidence from the N2pc, Pd, and topographic segmentation.
    Burra N; Kerzel D
    Psychophysiology; 2013 May; 50(5):422-30. PubMed ID: 23418888
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Learning to suppress likely distractor locations in visual search is driven by the local distractor frequency.
    Allenmark F; Zhang B; Shi Z; Müller HJ
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2022 Nov; 48(11):1250-1278. PubMed ID: 36107665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Ignoring the unknown: Attentional suppression of unpredictable visual distraction.
    Ma X; Abrams RA
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2023 Jan; 49(1):1-6. PubMed ID: 36227324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Rejecting salient distractors: Generalization from experience.
    Vatterott DB; Mozer MC; Vecera SP
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2018 Feb; 80(2):485-499. PubMed ID: 29230673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Habituation to abrupt-onset distractors with different spatial occurrence probability.
    Valsecchi M; Turatto M
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2023 Apr; 85(3):649-666. PubMed ID: 35851440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Salience-based selection: attentional capture by distractors less salient than the target.
    Zehetleitner M; Koch AI; Goschy H; Müller HJ
    PLoS One; 2013; 8(1):e52595. PubMed ID: 23382820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Attentional suppression in time and space.
    Xu Z; Los SA; Theeuwes J
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2021 Aug; 47(8):1056-1062. PubMed ID: 34516212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Repetition priming and repetition blindness: Effects of an intervening distractor word.
    Leggett JMI; Burt JS; Ceccato JM
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2019 Jun; 73(2):105-117. PubMed ID: 30896186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Intertrial target-feature changes do not lead to more distraction by singletons: target uncertainty does.
    Lamy D; Yashar A
    Vision Res; 2008 May; 48(10):1274-9. PubMed ID: 18395767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Salience detection and attentional capture.
    Schubö A
    Psychol Res; 2009 Mar; 73(2):233-43. PubMed ID: 19066945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Do salient abrupt onsets trigger suppression?
    Burgess E; Hauck C; De Pooter E; Ruthruff E; Lien MC
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2023 Apr; 85(3):634-648. PubMed ID: 36207664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Distinct roles of the intraparietal sulcus and temporoparietal junction in attentional capture from distractor features: An individual differences approach.
    Painter DR; Dux PE; Mattingley JB
    Neuropsychologia; 2015 Jul; 74():50-62. PubMed ID: 25724234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Modulating the influence of recent trial history on attentional capture via transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of right TPJ.
    Lega C; Santandrea E; Ferrante O; Serpe R; Dolci C; Baldini E; Cattaneo L; Chelazzi L
    Cortex; 2020 Dec; 133():149-160. PubMed ID: 33126008
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Multiple attentional control settings at distinct locations without the confounding of repetition priming.
    Cho SA; Cho YS
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2018 Oct; 80(7):1718-1730. PubMed ID: 29959663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Statistical regularities cause attentional suppression with target-matching distractors.
    Kerzel D; Huynh Cong S
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2021 Jan; 83(1):270-282. PubMed ID: 33251562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.