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: 36095246)

  • 1. Orientation effects support specialist processing of upright unfamiliar faces in children and adults.
    Ewing L; Mares I; Edwards SG; Smith ML
    Dev Psychol; 2023 Jun; 59(6):1109-1115. PubMed ID: 36095246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Distinct neural processes for the perception of familiar versus unfamiliar faces along the visual hierarchy revealed by EEG.
    Collins E; Robinson AK; Behrmann M
    Neuroimage; 2018 Nov; 181():120-131. PubMed ID: 29966716
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Face race and sex impact visual fixation strategies for upright and inverted faces in 3- to 6-year-old children.
    Farrell J; Conte S; Barry-Anwar R; Scott LS
    Dev Psychobiol; 2023 Mar; 65(2):e22362. PubMed ID: 36811376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Characterizing the neural signature of face processing in Williams syndrome via multivariate pattern analysis and event related potentials.
    Farran EK; Mares I; Papasavva M; Smith FW; Ewing L; Smith ML
    Neuropsychologia; 2020 May; 142():107440. PubMed ID: 32179101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effects of face inversion on the structural encoding and recognition of faces. Evidence from event-related brain potentials.
    Eimer M
    Brain Res Cogn Brain Res; 2000 Sep; 10(1-2):145-58. PubMed ID: 10978702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Inversion effects for faces and objects in developmental prosopagnosia: A case series analysis.
    Klargaard SK; Starrfelt R; Gerlach C
    Neuropsychologia; 2018 May; 113():52-60. PubMed ID: 29596857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Expertise with unfamiliar objects is flexible to changes in task but not changes in class.
    Searston RA; Tangen JM
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(6):e0178403. PubMed ID: 28574998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 3D faces are recognized more accurately and faster than 2D faces, but with similar inversion effects.
    Eng ZHD; Yick YY; Guo Y; Xu H; Reiner M; Cham TJ; Chen SHA
    Vision Res; 2017 Sep; 138():78-85. PubMed ID: 28687329
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Tolerance to spatial-relational transformations in unfamiliar faces: A further challenge to a configural processing account of identity recognition.
    Lorenzino M; Caminati M; Caudek C
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2018 Jul; 188():25-38. PubMed ID: 29807303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Electrophysiological evidence for parts and wholes in visual face memory.
    Towler J; Eimer M
    Cortex; 2016 Oct; 83():246-58. PubMed ID: 27614900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Cortical correlates of face and scene inversion: a comparison.
    Epstein RA; Higgins JS; Parker W; Aguirre GK; Cooperman S
    Neuropsychologia; 2006; 44(7):1145-58. PubMed ID: 16303149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The generality of the attentional boost effect for famous, unfamiliar, and inverted faces.
    Oliver GW; Lee VG
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2024 Feb; 31(1):234-241. PubMed ID: 37537318
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Revisiting the earliest electrophysiological correlate of familiar face recognition.
    Huang W; Wu X; Hu L; Wang L; Ding Y; Qu Z
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2017 Oct; 120():42-53. PubMed ID: 28684327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Visual search for complex objects: Set-size effects for faces, words and cars.
    Hemström J; Albonico A; Djouab S; Barton JJS
    Vision Res; 2019 Sep; 162():8-19. PubMed ID: 31233767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Face processing in humans and new world monkeys: the influence of experiential and ecological factors.
    Neiworth JJ; Hassett JM; Sylvester CJ
    Anim Cogn; 2007 Apr; 10(2):125-34. PubMed ID: 16909230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. From face processing to face recognition: Comparing three different processing levels.
    Besson G; Barragan-Jason G; Thorpe SJ; Fabre-Thorpe M; Puma S; Ceccaldi M; Barbeau EJ
    Cognition; 2017 Jan; 158():33-43. PubMed ID: 27776224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Does a cichlid fish process face holistically? Evidence of the face inversion effect.
    Kawasaka K; Hotta T; Kohda M
    Anim Cogn; 2019 Mar; 22(2):153-162. PubMed ID: 30603930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Activity in the right fusiform face area predicts the behavioural advantage for the perception of familiar faces.
    Weibert K; Andrews TJ
    Neuropsychologia; 2015 Aug; 75():588-96. PubMed ID: 26187507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Self-face recognition is characterized by "bilateral gain" and by faster, more accurate performance which persists when faces are inverted.
    Keyes H; Brady N
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2010 May; 63(5):840-7. PubMed ID: 20198537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Categorical perception effects for facial identity in robustly represented familiar and self-faces: the role of configural and featural information.
    Keyes H
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2012; 65(4):760-72. PubMed ID: 22248095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.