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 *

146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36274514)

  • 1. Does variability in recognition memory scale with mean memory strength or encoding variability in the UVSD model?
    Spanton RW; Berry CJ
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2023 Sep; 76(9):2037-2052. PubMed ID: 36274514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The unequal variance signal-detection model of recognition memory: Investigating the encoding variability hypothesis.
    Spanton RW; Berry CJ
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2020 Aug; 73(8):1242-1260. PubMed ID: 31986982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Three tests and three corrections: comment on Koen and Yonelinas (2010).
    Jang Y; Mickes L; Wixted JT
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2012 Mar; 38(2):513-23. PubMed ID: 22390323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Recognition receiver operating characteristic asymmetry: Increased noise or information?
    Dobbins IG
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2023 Feb; 49(2):216-229. PubMed ID: 36996188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Memory variability is due to the contribution of recollection and familiarity, not to encoding variability.
    Koen JD; Yonelinas AP
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2010 Nov; 36(6):1536-42. PubMed ID: 20854009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Examining the causes of memory strength variability: recollection, attention failure, or encoding variability?
    Koen JD; Aly M; Wang WC; Yonelinas AP
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2013 Nov; 39(6):1726-41. PubMed ID: 23834057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Some-or-none recollection: Evidence from item and source memory.
    Onyper SV; Zhang YX; Howard MW
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2010 May; 139(2):341-64. PubMed ID: 20438255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Mixing strong and weak targets provides no evidence against the unequal-variance explanation of ʐROC slope: a comment on Koen and Yonelinas (2010).
    Starns JJ; Rotello CM; Ratcliff R
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2012 May; 38(3):793-801. PubMed ID: 22545617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Using response time modeling to distinguish memory and decision processes in recognition and source tasks.
    Starns JJ
    Mem Cognit; 2014 Nov; 42(8):1357-72. PubMed ID: 25102773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The effects of variable encoding contexts on item and source recognition.
    Zhang M; Hupbach A
    Mem Cognit; 2023 Feb; 51(2):391-403. PubMed ID: 35980546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Bias effects in a two-stage recognition paradigm: A challenge for "pure" threshold and signal detection models.
    Ma Q; Starns JJ; Kellen D
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2022 Oct; 48(10):1484-1506. PubMed ID: 34968111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Unequal-strength source zROC slopes reflect criteria placement and not (necessarily) memory processes.
    Starns JJ; Pazzaglia AM; Rotello CM; Hautus MJ; Macmillan NA
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2013 Sep; 39(5):1377-92. PubMed ID: 23565789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A direct test of the unequal-variance signal detection model of recognition memory.
    Mickes L; Wixted JT; Wais PE
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2007 Oct; 14(5):858-65. PubMed ID: 18087950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Testing signal-detection models of yes/no and two-alternative forced-choice recognition memory.
    Jang Y; Wixted JT; Huber DE
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2009 May; 138(2):291-306. PubMed ID: 19397385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Event-related potential correlates of item and source memory strength.
    Woroch B; Gonsalves BD
    Brain Res; 2010 Mar; 1317():180-91. PubMed ID: 20051237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The diagnosticity of individual data for model selection: comparing signal-detection models of recognition memory.
    Jang Y; Wixted JT; Huber DE
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2011 Aug; 18(4):751-7. PubMed ID: 21538201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Pupil dilation during recognition reflects the subjective recollection/familiarity experience at test rather than the level of processing at encoding.
    Taikh A; Bodner GE
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2022 Sep; 76(3):186-192. PubMed ID: 35549359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Pure-list production improves item recognition and sometimes also improves source memory.
    Bodner GE; Huff MJ; Taikh A
    Mem Cognit; 2020 Oct; 48(7):1281-1294. PubMed ID: 32399916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Dissociative effects of orthographic distinctiveness in pure and mixed lists: an item-order account.
    McDaniel MA; Cahill M; Bugg JM; Meadow NG
    Mem Cognit; 2011 Oct; 39(7):1162-73. PubMed ID: 21584853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The distribution of subjective memory strength: list strength and response bias.
    Criss AH
    Cogn Psychol; 2009 Dec; 59(4):297-319. PubMed ID: 19765699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.