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.
22. Repetition blindness between visually different items: the case of pictures and words. Bavelier D Cognition; 1994 Mar; 51(3):199-236. PubMed ID: 8194301 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Adaptability and specificity of inhibition processes in distractor-induced blindness. Winther GN; Niedeggen M Psychophysiology; 2017 Dec; 54(12):1882-1898. PubMed ID: 28892157 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. What can we learn about visual attention to multiple words from the word-word interference task? Mulatti C; Ceccherini L; Coltheart M Mem Cognit; 2015 Jan; 43(1):121-32. PubMed ID: 25052252 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Sublexical processing in visual recognition of Chinese characters: evidence from repetition blindness for subcharacter components. Yeh SL; Li JL Brain Lang; 2004 Jan; 88(1):47-53. PubMed ID: 14698730 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Manipulations of distractor frequency do not mitigate emotion-induced blindness. Zhao JL; Most SB Cogn Emot; 2019 May; 33(3):442-451. PubMed ID: 29644917 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. When do irrelevant visual stimuli impair processing of identical targets? Wühr P; Müsseler J Percept Psychophys; 2005 Jul; 67(5):897-909. PubMed ID: 16334061 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. The effects of bilateral presentations on lateralized lexical decision. Fernandino L; Iacoboni M; Zaidel E Brain Cogn; 2007 Jun; 64(1):60-7. PubMed ID: 17257728 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Distractor intrusions are the result of delayed attentional engagement: A new temporal variability account of attentional selectivity in dynamic visual tasks. Zivony A; Eimer M J Exp Psychol Gen; 2021 Jan; 150(1):23-41. PubMed ID: 32700923 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Priming from distractors in rapid serial visual presentation is modulated by image properties and attention. Harris IM; Benito CT; Dux PE J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2010 Dec; 36(6):1595-608. PubMed ID: 20718560 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Repetition blindness has a perceptual locus: evidence from online processing of targets in RSVP streams. Johnston JC; Hochhaus L; Ruthruff E J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2002 Apr; 28(2):477-89. PubMed ID: 11999868 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Attention and eye-movement control in reading: The selective reading paradigm. Reingold EM; Sheridan H; Meadmore KL; Drieghe D; Liversedge SP J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2016 Dec; 42(12):2003-2020. PubMed ID: 27643527 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. History Modulates Early Sensory Processing of Salient Distractors. Adam KCS; Serences JT J Neurosci; 2021 Sep; 41(38):8007-8022. PubMed ID: 34330776 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Repetition blindness under minimum memory load: effects of spatial and temporal proximity and the encoding effectiveness of the first item. Luo CR; Caramazza A Percept Psychophys; 1995 Oct; 57(7):1053-64. PubMed ID: 8532495 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Identity and similarity in repetition blindness: no cross-over interaction. Harris CL; Morris AL Cognition; 2001 Aug; 81(1):1-40. PubMed ID: 11525479 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Complex background information slows down parallel search efficiency by reducing the strength of interitem interactions. Cui AY; Lleras A; Ng GJP; Buetti S J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2023 Jul; 49(7):1053-1067. PubMed ID: 37261744 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]