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 *

111 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36115134)

  • 1. Investigation on the effects of presentation modality for spatial signals on human performance using a dual task paradigm.
    Kang SX; Man SS; Chan AHS
    Appl Ergon; 2023 Jan; 106():103898. PubMed ID: 36115134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Tracking and discrete dual task performance for different visual spatial stimulus-response mappings with focal and ambient vision.
    Tsang SNH; Chan AHS
    Appl Ergon; 2018 Feb; 67():39-49. PubMed ID: 29122199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Auditory versus visual spatial stimulus-response mappings in tracking and discrete dual task performance: implications for human-machine interface design.
    Tsang SNH; Chan AHS; Pan X; Man SS
    Ergonomics; 2021 Apr; 64(4):485-501. PubMed ID: 33103599
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Tracking and discrete dual task performance with different spatial stimulus-response mappings.
    Tsang SN; Chan AH
    Ergonomics; 2015; 58(3):368-82. PubMed ID: 25396283
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Supporting interruption management and multimodal interface design: three meta-analyses of task performance as a function of interrupting task modality.
    Lu SA; Wickens CD; Prinet JC; Hutchins SD; Sarter N; Sebok A
    Hum Factors; 2013 Aug; 55(4):697-724. PubMed ID: 23964412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Vision and Haptics Share Spatial Attentional Resources and Visuotactile Integration Is Not Affected by High Attentional Load.
    Wahn B; König P
    Multisens Res; 2015; 28(3-4):371-92. PubMed ID: 26288905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Tactile Stimuli Increase Effects of Modality Compatibility in Task Switching.
    Stephan DN; Koch I
    Exp Psychol; 2015; 62(4):276-84. PubMed ID: 26421450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Eliminating dual-task costs by minimizing crosstalk between tasks: The role of modality and feature pairings.
    Göthe K; Oberauer K; Kliegl R
    Cognition; 2016 May; 150():92-108. PubMed ID: 26878090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Interference effects of stimulus-response modality pairings in dual tasks and their robustness.
    Stelzel C; Schubert T
    Psychol Res; 2011 Nov; 75(6):476-90. PubMed ID: 21811837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Simple auditory and visual interruptions of a continuous visual tracking task: modality effects and time course of interference.
    Nees MA; Sampsell NG
    Ergonomics; 2021 Jul; 64(7):879-890. PubMed ID: 33428536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Sensitivity evaluation of the visual, tactile, and auditory detection response task method while driving.
    Stojmenova K; Jakus G; Sodnik J
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2017 May; 18(4):431-436. PubMed ID: 27588336
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Modality-specific effects of mental fatigue in multitasking.
    Mueckstein M; Heinzel S; Granacher U; Brahms M; Rapp MA; Stelzel C
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2022 Oct; 230():103766. PubMed ID: 36242924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Emerging features of modality mappings in task switching: modality compatibility requires variability at the level of both stimulus and response modality.
    Fintor E; Stephan DN; Koch I
    Psychol Res; 2018 Jan; 82(1):121-133. PubMed ID: 28578525
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Non-visual spatial tasks reveal increased interactions with stance postural control.
    Woollacott M; Vander Velde T
    Brain Res; 2008 May; 1208():95-102. PubMed ID: 18394592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Postural prioritization is differentially altered in healthy older compared to younger adults during visual and auditory coded spatial multitasking.
    Liston MB; Bergmann JH; Keating N; Green DA; Pavlou M
    Gait Posture; 2014 Jan; 39(1):198-204. PubMed ID: 23891026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Role of multiple resources in predicting time-sharing efficiency: evaluation of three workload models in a multiple-task setting.
    Sarno KJ; Wickens CD
    Int J Aviat Psychol; 1995; 5(1):107-30. PubMed ID: 11541493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Audition and vision share spatial attentional resources, yet attentional load does not disrupt audiovisual integration.
    Wahn B; König P
    Front Psychol; 2015; 6():1084. PubMed ID: 26284008
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Effectiveness of auditory and tactile crossmodal cues in a dual-task visual and auditory scenario.
    Hopkins K; Kass SJ; Blalock LD; Brill JC
    Ergonomics; 2017 May; 60(5):692-700. PubMed ID: 27267493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. On the peculiarity of simple reaction time.
    Goodrich S; Henderson L; Allchin N; Jeevaratnam A
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 1990 Nov; 42(4):763-75. PubMed ID: 2287761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Visual and Proprioceptive Influences on Tactile Spatial Processing in Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorders.
    Hense M; Badde S; Köhne S; Dziobek I; Röder B
    Autism Res; 2019 Dec; 12(12):1745-1757. PubMed ID: 31507084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.