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 *

176 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35257300)

  • 1. The effect of proportion manipulation on the size-congruency and distance effects in the numerical Stroop task.
    Shichel I; Goldfarb L
    Mem Cognit; 2022 Oct; 50(7):1578-1589. PubMed ID: 35257300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Electrophysiological Correlates of the Interaction of Physical and Numerical Size in Symbolic Number Processing: Insights from a Novel Go/Nogo Numerical Stroop Task.
    Pekár J; Hofmann W; Knakker B; Tamm S; Kinder A
    Brain Sci; 2023 Apr; 13(5):. PubMed ID: 37239174
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Event-Related Potentials Reveal the Impact of Conflict Strength in a Numerical Stroop Paradigm.
    Vurdah N; Vidal J; Viarouge A
    Brain Sci; 2023 Mar; 13(4):. PubMed ID: 37190551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Cognitive control during a spatial Stroop task: Comparing conflict monitoring and prediction of response-outcome theories.
    Pires L; Leitão J; Guerrini C; Simões MR
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2018 Sep; 189():63-75. PubMed ID: 28683927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The effect of spatial distance on numerical distance processing.
    Shichel I; Goldfarb L
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2024 Jul; ():17470218241263325. PubMed ID: 38853289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Congruency proportion reveals asymmetric processing of irrelevant physical and numerical dimensions in the size congruity paradigm.
    Borgmann K; Fugelsang J; Ansari D; Besner D
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2011 Jun; 65(2):98-104. PubMed ID: 21668091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Adjustment of control in the numerical Stroop task.
    Dadon G; Henik A
    Mem Cognit; 2017 Aug; 45(6):891-902. PubMed ID: 28337604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Finding an interaction between Stroop congruency and flanker congruency requires a large congruency effect: A within-trial combination of conflict tasks.
    Rey-Mermet A
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2020 Jul; 82(5):2271-2301. PubMed ID: 31974936
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Dissociating response conflict from numerical magnitude processing in the brain: an event-related fMRI study.
    Ansari D; Fugelsang JA; Dhital B; Venkatraman V
    Neuroimage; 2006 Aug; 32(2):799-805. PubMed ID: 16731007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Modulation of conflicts in the Stroop effect.
    Shichel I; Tzelgov J
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2018 Sep; 189():93-102. PubMed ID: 29078981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Congruency sequence effect in cross-task context: evidence for dimension-specific modulation.
    Lee J; Cho YS
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2013 Nov; 144(3):617-27. PubMed ID: 24184348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Dissociable early attentional control mechanisms underlying cognitive and affective conflicts.
    Chen T; Kendrick KM; Feng C; Sun S; Yang X; Wang X; Luo W; Yang S; Huang X; Valdés-Sosa PA; Gong Q; Fan J; Luo YJ
    Sci Rep; 2016 Nov; 6():37633. PubMed ID: 27892513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Congruency precues moderate item-specific proportion congruency effects.
    Hutchison KA; Bugg JM; Lim YB; Olsen MR
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2016 May; 78(4):1087-103. PubMed ID: 26860710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The role of contingency and correlation in the Stroop task.
    Hasshim N; Parris BA
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2021 Oct; 74(10):1657-1668. PubMed ID: 34190618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The bidirectional congruency effect of brightness-valence metaphoric association in the Stroop-like and priming paradigms.
    Huang Y; Tse CS; Xie J
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2018 Sep; 189():76-92. PubMed ID: 29108645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Interacting congruency effects in the hybrid Stroop-Simon task prevent conclusions regarding the domain specificity or generality of the congruency sequence effect.
    Weissman DH
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2020 May; 46(5):945-967. PubMed ID: 31580121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Unconscious context-specific proportion congruency effect in a stroop-like task.
    Panadero A; Castellanos MC; Tudela P
    Conscious Cogn; 2015 Jan; 31():35-45. PubMed ID: 25460239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Working memory capacity and Stroop interference: global versus local indices of executive control.
    Meier ME; Kane MJ
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2013 May; 39(3):748-759. PubMed ID: 22774858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Which digit is larger? Brain responses to number and size interactions in a numerical Stroop task.
    Huang HW; Nascimben M; Wang YY; Fong DY; Tzeng OJ; Huang CM
    Psychophysiology; 2021 Mar; 58(3):e13744. PubMed ID: 33314155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The numerical stroop effect in primary school children: a comparison of low, normal, and high achievers.
    Heine A; Tamm S; De Smedt B; Schneider M; Thaler V; Torbeyns J; Stern E; Verschaffel L; Jacobs A
    Child Neuropsychol; 2010; 16(5):461-77. PubMed ID: 20437281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.