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 *

117 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36655885)

  • 21. Lower constraint testing enhances the testing effect for some contextual details but not others.
    Giannakopoulos KL; McCurdy MP; Sklenar AM; Frankenstein AN; Urban Levy P; Leshikar ED
    Brain Behav; 2024 Jan; 14(1):e3380. PubMed ID: 38376029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. The self-choice effect from a multiple-cue perspective.
    Watanabe T; Soraci SA
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2004 Feb; 11(1):168-72. PubMed ID: 15117004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Repeated retrieval practice and item difficulty: does criterion learning eliminate item difficulty effects?
    Vaughn KE; Rawson KA; Pyc MA
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2013 Dec; 20(6):1239-45. PubMed ID: 23589200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Interpreting instructional cues in task switching procedures: the role of mediator retrieval.
    Logan GD; Schneider DW
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2006 Mar; 32(2):347-63. PubMed ID: 16569151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The relationship between study processing and the effects of cue congruency at retrieval: fMRI support for transfer appropriate processing.
    Park H; Rugg MD
    Cereb Cortex; 2008 Apr; 18(4):868-75. PubMed ID: 17652467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Metacognitive monitoring during criterion learning: when and why are judgments accurate?
    Pyc MA; Rawson KA; Aschenbrenner AJ
    Mem Cognit; 2014 Aug; 42(6):886-97. PubMed ID: 24643790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Encoding specificity revisited: the role of semantics.
    Hannon B; Craik FI
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2001 Sep; 55(3):231-43. PubMed ID: 11605558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Does the benefit of testing depend on lag, and if so, why? Evaluating the elaborative retrieval hypothesis.
    Rawson KA; Vaughn KE; Carpenter SK
    Mem Cognit; 2015 May; 43(4):619-33. PubMed ID: 25344296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Does Item Difficulty Affect the Magnitude of the Retrieval Practice Effect? An Evaluation of the Retrieval Effort Hypothesis.
    Lima MFR; Venâncio S; Feminella J; Buratto LG
    Span J Psychol; 2020 Aug; 23():e31. PubMed ID: 32772963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Performance feedback enhances test-potentiated encoding.
    Ludowicy P; Paz-Alonso PM; Lachmann T; Czernochowski D
    Front Behav Neurosci; 2023; 17():1100497. PubMed ID: 37153935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Memory as discrimination: a challenge to the encoding-retrieval match principle.
    Poirier M; Nairne JS; Morin C; Zimmermann FG; Koutmeridou K; Fowler J
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2012 Jan; 38(1):16-29. PubMed ID: 21823814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Self-generation amplifies the errorless learning effect in healthy older adults when transfer appropriate processing conditions are met.
    Guild EB; Anderson ND
    Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn; 2012 Sep; 19(5):592-607. PubMed ID: 22247977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Test-enhanced learning for pairs and triplets: When and why does transfer occur?
    Rickard TC; Pan SC
    Mem Cognit; 2020 Oct; 48(7):1146-1160. PubMed ID: 32495320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Value-directed learning: Schematic reward structure facilitates learning.
    Silaj KM; Agadzhanyan K; Castel AD
    Mem Cognit; 2023 Oct; 51(7):1527-1546. PubMed ID: 36892706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Making remembering more memorable.
    Leppanen ML; Lyle KB
    Memory; 2018 Aug; 26(7):960-973. PubMed ID: 29291672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Dissociable correlates of two classes of retrieval processing in prefrontal cortex.
    Ranganath C; Heller AS; Wilding EL
    Neuroimage; 2007 May; 35(4):1663-73. PubMed ID: 17368914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Effect of room size on geometry and features cue preference during reorientation: Modulating encoding strength or cue weighting.
    Wang L; Mou W
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2020 Feb; 73(2):225-238. PubMed ID: 31390927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Testing the myth of the encoding-retrieval match.
    Goh WD; Lu SH
    Mem Cognit; 2012 Jan; 40(1):28-39. PubMed ID: 21830162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Age differences in encoding specificity.
    Puglisi JT; Park DC; Smith AD; Dudley WN
    J Gerontol; 1988 Nov; 43(6):P145-50. PubMed ID: 3183310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Automatic retrieval of new associations under shallow encoding conditions.
    Reingold EM; Goshen-Gottstein Y
    Conscious Cogn; 1996; 5(1-2):117-30. PubMed ID: 8733926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.