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.
106 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6227685)
1. Visual and phonetic codes and the process of generation in letter matching. Boles DB; Eveland DC J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1983 Oct; 9(5):657-74. PubMed ID: 6227685 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Verbal asymmetries and levels of processing in an interactive dual-task paradigm. Adams BJ; Duda PD Percept Mot Skills; 1985 Apr; 60(2):371-83. PubMed ID: 4000849 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Visual and phonetic memory in preschool children: evidence for coding flexibility. Brown RM Percept Mot Skills; 1977 Dec; 45(3 Pt 2):1043-50. PubMed ID: 604878 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Fast visual generation: its nature and chronometrics. Boles DB Percept Psychophys; 1992 Mar; 51(3):239-46. PubMed ID: 1561049 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The visual processor module and normal adult readers. Bigsby P Br J Psychol; 1988 Nov; 79 ( Pt 4)():455-69. PubMed ID: 3208001 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The naming of disoriented letters by normal and reading-disabled children. Corballis MC; Macadie L; Crotty A; Beale IL J Child Psychol Psychiatry; 1985 Nov; 26(6):929-38. PubMed ID: 4066817 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Visual letter-matching and the time course of visual and acoustic codes. Carrasco M; Kinchla RA; Figueroa JG Acta Psychol (Amst); 1988 Oct; 69(1):1-17. PubMed ID: 3245474 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Flexible coding in word recognition. Hawkins HL; Reicher GM; Rogers M; Peterson L J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1976 Aug; 2(3):380-5. PubMed ID: 993743 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Left visual field superiority in a letter-naming task for both left- and right-handers. Bashore TR; Nydegger RV; Miller H Cortex; 1982 Jul; 18(2):245-55. PubMed ID: 7128173 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Familiarity effects and word unitization in visual comparison tasks. Marmurek HH Mem Cognit; 1989 Jul; 17(4):483-9. PubMed ID: 2761406 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Phonetic coding in marginally competent readers. Brown RM; Sanocki T; Schrot D J Gen Psychol; 1983 Jul; 109(1st Half):87-94. PubMed ID: 6619819 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Visual persistence and code selection in short-term memory for letters. Kirsner K; Sang DL J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1979 May; 5(2):260-76. PubMed ID: 528938 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Effects of learning experience to the visual field advantage on random form recognition]. Yoshizaki K Shinrigaku Kenkyu; 1988 Dec; 59(5):273-9. PubMed ID: 3244209 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effect of altered central and peripheral visual field stimulation on correct recognition and visual evoked response. Mancuso RP; Lawrence AF; Hintze RW; White CT Int J Neurosci; 1979; 9(2):113-22. PubMed ID: 478749 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Phonetic factors in letter detection: a reevaluation. Drewnowski A; Healy AF Mem Cognit; 1982 Mar; 10(2):145-54. PubMed ID: 7087778 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Induced coding strategies and hemispheric differences in matching letter pairs. Edwards J; Venables PH Neuropsychologia; 1982; 20(6):669-74. PubMed ID: 7162589 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Left and right visual field superiority for letter classification. Jonides J Q J Exp Psychol; 1979 Aug; 31(3):423-39. PubMed ID: 504547 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Generation of visual representations. Yaworsky KB; Johnson N J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1981 Oct; 7(5):978-84. PubMed ID: 6457118 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]